Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives June 27 2021

Consensual review edit

File:Klasztor_kamedułów_ponad_starorzeczem_Wisły_przed_wschodem_słońca_w_Krakowie,_20210610_0437_7097.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination View of camaldolese monastery and church, just before sunrise, over the oxbow lake of Vistula River in Kraków --Jakubhal 05:56, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Nefronus 06:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Beautiful artistic landscapes are presented, but all f/4.. Is this normal for landscape photography? Can we talk about meeting the depth of field requirement? I don't want to offend anyone, but I'm sorry... Let's discuss. --Александр Байдуков 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support If you don’t have a tripod, it’s the only way to keep shutter time low enough according to the focal length of the lens and relatively low ISO --Moroder 04:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Good colours. Insufficient DoF. Composition is disturbed by the blurred shrubbery on left. --Tagooty 05:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support: Somewhat oversaturated. As far as DOF is concerned: I, too, would probably have stopped down one aperture stop further. But shooting landscapes doesn't mean that everything has to be in focus from close up to far away. A photographer has room for creativity.--Smial 08:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support The trees on the riverbank are in focus. Monastery and church are probably a little bit out of focus, but I don’t think that stopping down would have revealed more details because they are anyway softened by the mist. On the water, no more details are necessary. So the only element obviously out of focus is the tree at the left, but this is IMHO a valid choice of the photographer (that tree is not the center of attention). Overall this is an atmospheric photo, and IMHO the choice of f/4 has contributed to the good rendering of the misty morning atmosphere. --Aristeas 10:58, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support per Aristeas, whose argument is persuasive. -- Ikan Kekek 16:54, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:50, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

File:SDC_on_Blocks.jpg edit

 

  •   Support Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek 00:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose crop, dark, low contrast. Glrx 22:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose Per Glrx. Nefronus 06:57, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support --Commonists 09:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment I have a few shots of this from further away with the bottom blocks in the frame, but I would crop it to keep focus on the boat/blocks. I'll upload it sometime soon and see what you all think of it. Thanks for the feedback. GuavaTrain 12:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment New version uploaded! It appeared here automatically. GuavaTrain 17:46, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark.--Ermell 08:50, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support OK 4 me. --Palauenc05 20:08, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:53, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

File:E351系_s22編成.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination A JR East E351 running on Super Azusa service (by Haswell2011) --廣九直通車 10:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
      Oppose Sorry, wrong perspective of a train. --Steindy 13:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
      Support The train is clearly banking while traversing a tight curve. Good enough for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodhullandemu (talk • contribs)
  Info Trains are usually recorded in such a way that the hole train can be seen. A position on the inside of the curve would be the right choice here. For example, see User:Kabelleger. A sharp photo allone is not enough! --Steindy 14:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
  Comment I find railway companies are extremely sensitive about where they will allow people, so it's possible that a view on the inside of the curve is not available. Rodhullandemu 15:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Don’t see what is wrong --Moroder 10:47, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment Assuming that the posts of the overhead electric line are vertical, the photo needs a slight perspective correction. There also seems to me to be a slight barrel distortion, but whether a correction is necessary, you can probably only see when you have made the perpendiculars vertical. In every other respect, I think the photo is good enough for QI. --Smial 14:56, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Composition is off, just front face and tail of train shows, and mountain aligns with top of train face. Glrx 22:06, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Glrx. Nefronus 06:56, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good image. @Haswell2011: @廣九直通車: Slight PC per Smial will help. --Tagooty 08:37, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support --Commonists 09:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Glrx.--Lmbuga 22:08, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A smaller aperture would have solved the problem--Ermell 08:49, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good enough for QI. Selbymay 09:57, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good enough IMO --Robert Flogaus-Faust 19:12, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)