Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 30 2019

Consensual review edit

File:MG0988x.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Melnā ezera purvs nature reserve. By User:Photo Dace
  • Decline
      Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:11, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
      Oppose I disagree for now. Please give the image a meaningful name and some categories. --Podzemnik 21:49, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
      Comment - It's a beautiful photo. I agree that it should have a meaningful name, but is there a good more specific category for it? For example, is there a category for swamps? -- Ikan Kekek 00:36, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Quality Image. --Ralf Roletschek 05:41, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For now; the file needs a meaningful title, per the Guidelines.--Peulle 08:36, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A very atmospheric photo, but it shows CA, is overexposed (colour channel clipping) and has too much noise. I don't care for meaningful file names, but the picture description may be a bit more detailed and informative. A line of English text would be nice. --Smial 09:41, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
  • For English text, see "Captions": Nature reserve “Melnais Lake Mire”. -- Ikan Kekek 18:29, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 23:57, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Tilicho_lake_and_Tilicho_peak.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination The reflection of Tilicho peak on Tilicho lake. By User:Llrr --Biplab Anand 03:20, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Comment There are many lens flares on the left and there is some ccw tilt --Poco a poco 07:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Chenspec 10:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I agree with Poco. Lens flare need to be removed --Podzemnik 18:15, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The sky is a little blotchy and should be smoothed out. -- Ikan Kekek 00:41, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I don't have a problem with some lens flare, as it is not really disturbing in this case. But the jpg compression factor is far too high, everywhere compression artifacts. Also some CA. Please reprocess from Raw, if available, and use better quality level when saving to JPG. -- Smial 09:32, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 23:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Foro_Romano_e_Palazzo_Maggi_Gambara_Brescia.jpg edit

 

Left side. Or maybe just a bit overexposed-looking. -- Ikan Kekek 04:59, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Is it stitched? The house on the right looks tilted ccw. It seems there are also CAs in the entrance area. I don´t see any haze. Maybe it's meant that it looks like the lens was a bit misty. --Milseburg 10:52, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose The quality is far below your usual standard. Strong CA and the contrasts in the shadow areas look extremely unnatural and much too dull. I'm also pretty sure that the two people on the left wore black clothes and not muddy grey. --Smial 09:23, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose - You have not edited out the dust spots. And I think the word I was looking for to describe the left side is "overexposed". I hoped some haze was responsible. -- Ikan Kekek 03:21, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •   I withdraw my nomination Thanks to all for your comments--Moroder 05:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Columba_livia_domestica.676_-_La_Virgen_del_Camino_(Leon).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Juvenile of Columba livia domestica (pigeon) in La Virgen del Camino (municipality of Valverde de la Virgen, León, Spain).--Drow male 06:53, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion }
  •   Support Although I'm not super happy with the camera's post processing, it's good enough overall. --MB-one 07:15, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. Strong posterization --George Chernilevsky 14:43, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'm also concern about how these images were taken. The pidgeon must have been frightened by dozens of your flashes directly in its nest. --Podzemnik 23:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
    * *   Comment - I like pigeons, but you're even more of a softy toward them than I am. I think pigeons are pretty unflappable in dealing with human beings and doubt some sessions with a photographer with a flash will severely scar them for life. They do have excellent eyesight, but I don't know how flash affects them, and Drow male may have unusually good rapport with pigeons and get them to relax. He was certainly able to photograph right into a pigeon nest, which is not a common occurrence. -- Ikan Kekek 04:56, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
    •   Comment - This pigeon came out of the egg under a window of the apartment where I lived in La Virgen del Camino (León, Spain). My idea was to take at least 2 photos of each day during its development while I was in the apartment. For personal reasons I had to return to live in A Coruña, and I suppose that when I return to the apartment for my things and to return the keys to the landlord within more than a month, the pigeon has already flown from the nest. I hope so, because I think the landlord does not want pigeons right under the apartment window. --Drow male 05:25, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - Could be sharper, but sharp enough at a reasonable size, IMO. I'm not bothered by whatever posterization you're seeing - the colors of the pigeon's feathers seem believable to me. -- Ikan Kekek 07:07, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Quality and you should not be this close to a newborn chick. Mother may abandon. Charlesjsharp 16:47, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
    • @Charlesjsharp: Can you elaborate on the "quality" part. And 0.7 m (calculated) seems to be a safe distance to me. --MB-one 09:54, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. --Aristeas 15:35, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Seven Pandas 00:00, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Kagbeni,_Mustang_03.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination The fascinating and beautiful village of Kagbeni (2840m) on sea level. By User:Nrik kiran --Biplab Anand 09:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   SupportGood quality. --Manfred Kuzel 10:47, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice view, but I disagree about the quality. --A.Savin 16:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality for me, perhaps no FP. -- Spurzem 11:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Details are washed out, there is some chroma noise and blotches in the sky.--Peulle 14:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Details are washed out.--Tobias ToMar Maier 14:37, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit overprocessed (someone would say "weichgelutscht" but nice --Moroder 09:02, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per others some montains has halos --Cvmontuy 17:39, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Disturbing CA and missing detail.--Ermell 19:08, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 08:47, 29 May 2019 (UTC)