Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 08 2021

Consensual review edit

File:SC_Wiener_Neustadt_vs._SC_Austria_Lustenau_2018-04-24_(061).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Marcel Kanadi, footballplayer of SC Austria Lustenau. --Steindy 00:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose Disturbing blurry hand and background, not a QI to me, sorry --Poco a poco 17:46, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment I disagree! How big should the depth of field be for a portrait with a focal length of 480 mm? The face is super sharp and that is what matters. --Steindy 00:38, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support I think it is OK. --Augustgeyler 01:07, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support I do, too. -- Ikan Kekek 06:48, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support --Commonists 22:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose the blurry hand is too distracting, it lowers the overall quality of the image. -- The night rainbow 07:34, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Augustgeyler 11:03, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

File:HAZRATBAL_SHRINE_01.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Hazratbal Shrine in Srinagar city of Jammu and Kashmir, India. By User:Hardikmodi --Hulged 16:33, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Comment A little bit too dark. And please fix the verticals. --XRay 18:45, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support A subject of very light material like this is IMHO better of a bit on the dark side to get all the structure from it. I can't see the vertical issue. Geocoding Commons:Image_guidelines#Location is recommended and very informative. --Goran tek-en 15:40, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment May be you have another opinion and you may promote the image, but IMO it isn't good to overrule an existing issue/request. I change your promotion to discuss. --XRay 18:31, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not only underexposed but poorly framed, noisy and with little detail. The foreground is blurred. Barel distortion. Alvesgaspar 13:45, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose underexposed, a bit noisy / unsharp, needs perspective correction. --Trougnouf 13:50, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Augustgeyler 21:43, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Κτίριο_Μπον_Μαρσέ,_Ηράκλειο_3345.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination The Bon Marche in Heraklion, Crete. --C messier 16:38, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support A bit soft, but good for QI. --Tagooty 01:42, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too soft in my eyes and visible lens distortion. --Augustgeyler 02:06, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality imo. --Trougnouf 13:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Augustgeyler 21:44, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Kasimov._Church_of_the_Annunciation_P5220908_2350.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Kasimov. Church of the Annunciation --Alexxx1979 09:52, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality --Michielverbeek 10:00, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, but this picture is oversaturated in my view. The colors just don't look natural. --Imehling 12:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Colours look natural to me. I would crop the streetlight on the left and some of the mud road in front. --Tagooty 04:50, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment The greens may be oversaturated. -- Ikan Kekek 07:32, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Steindy 21:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Blue and green colors oversaturated. --Fischer.H 10:12, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Looks like WB if off towards the greens, especially in the walls of the building -- Alvesgaspar 11:50, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support OK. --A.Savin 18:57, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose It is oversaturated, but just too much. --Augustgeyler 18:29, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 22:15, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Trougnouf 13:46, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Oversaturated image, both blues and greens --Yeriho 14:23, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Promoted   --Augustgeyler 21:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Portland_Aerial_Tram,_Portland,_Oregon_(2013)_-_2.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Portland Aerial Tram, Portland, Oregon --Another Believer 03:40, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:17, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Disagree, image is noisy, there are   chromatic aberrations, and part of the gondola is overexposed. --A.Savin 13:46, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good focus to main object --Michielverbeek 08:06, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The background looks very compressed. Level of detail is too low. --Augustgeyler 11:18, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support The main subject, the gondola, is well captured. --Tagooty 08s:02, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support --Commonists 22:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per A.Savin, part of the gondola is overexposed. --Trougnouf 13:44, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Lots of smearing like from a cheap phone --Yeriho 14:29, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per August.--Peulle 19:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Declined   --Augustgeyler 21:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)