Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 16 2013

• 
  • Nomination Ophisops elegans (by Benny Trapp) --Achim Raschka 20:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion
• 
  • Nomination Two timber-framed houses in the historic center of Mülheim an der Ruhr (Teinerstraße 2 and Teinerstraße 4) --Tuxyso 18:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion very good. --Ralf Roletschek 18:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Marina Piccola, Ferry and yacht port of Sorrento, gulf of Naples, Campania, Italy. --NorbertNagel 18:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion High quality -- Spurzem 19:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Castello Aragonese near Baia, Campania, Italy. --NorbertNagel 18:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 18:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Flavian Amphitheater (Anfiteatro flaviano puteolano), located in Pozzuoli, is the third largest Roman amphitheater in Italy. --NorbertNagel 18:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support QI --Rjcastillo 19:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Belfry of the Holy Spirit church in Żabno --Kroton 17:37, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support QI --Rjcastillo 19:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Steve Morse (Deep Purple) performing at Músicos en la naturaleza 2013 in Hoyos del Espino, Ávila, Spain. --Kadellar 17:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Really cool pic, and QI for me -- Achim Raschka 19:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 93 1360 of the Wutach Valley Railway (originally 378.60 of the BBÖ) shunting at the station Zollhaus-Blumberg. --Llez 16:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Kadellar 16:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Early morning, New Delhi railway station --Bahnfrend 15:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Not perfect, but I like it.--ArildV 16:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Baudenkmal im Stadtbezirk Dortmund-Aplerbeck. Hofanlagen in Sölde, Sölder Straße --Smial 15:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 16:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Amtshaus Bork, denkmalgeschütztes Gebäude in Selm --Smial 15:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Denkmalgeschütztes Gebäude in Dortmund-Wickede --Smial 15:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Pine-tree (Pinus pinaster) between shadow and light, Meschers-sur-Gironde, Charente-Maritime, France. --JLPC 14:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Markup on temporary road, on a site of LGV Sud Europe Atlantique construction, Châtignac, Charente, France. --JLPC 14:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 15:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Southeastern Quadrangular Tower, Tobolsk Kremlin. --Óðinn 14:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. Somewhat oversharpened, but ok --Smial 15:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Putti on the Altar in the Saint Bartholomew church in Nafen Villnöß --Moroder 14:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Putto on the altar in the Saint Bartholomew church in Nafen Villnöß --Moroder 14:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --JDP90 17:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Putto on the altar in the Saint Bartholomew church in Nafen Villnöß --Moroder 14:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination "Saint-Étienne" Abbey in Bassac in France --Moroder 14:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Not a QI, sorry, too tight crop, tilted, CA --Poco a poco 14:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Detail on the facade of Saint-Pierre church in Écurat in France --Moroder 14:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 14:46, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Small beach in Sickla Strand, Nacka, Stockholm. Sicklasjön (lake Sickla). --ArildV 14:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 14:46, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Grand Hotell Hörnan in Uppsala. Built 1907. Architect: Ture Stenberg. --ArildV 14:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Farm building in Stenby village, Adelsö, Stockholm County. --ArildV 14:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. I'd suggest a tighter crop, but ok as is --Smial 15:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A Sudan plated lizard (Gerrhosaurus major) warming itself on a sunlit rock in Watamu, Kenya. (Microphonics) --Azusa 13:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Strong pixelation, overexposed areas, not a QI, sorry --Poco a poco 15:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Detail of a ceiling and a niche, Vatican City.--Jebulon 13:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Nice.--ArildV 14:08, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Doric, Ionic and Corinthian pilasters, Colosseum, Rome, Italy.--Jebulon 13:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Didactic and QI. --JLPC 14:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Sculpted marble stone, Forum Romanum, Rome, Italy.--Jebulon 13:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion I wish the plants weren't there, but QI overall. --Óðinn 15:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Storage building in Berg, a small village at Möja island, Stockholm archipelago. --ArildV 13:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn Not very sharp.--ArildV 15:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Habour in Berg, a small village at Möja island, Stockholm archipelago. --ArildV 13:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Waiting room at Ramsmora jetty, Möja island, Stockholm archipelago. --ArildV 13:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Airbus A330-302 B-18311 from SkyTeam (China Airlines) in Hong Kong --Ralf Roletschek 13:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Airbus A330-200 of Air Seychelles at Hong Kong Airport --Ralf Roletschek 13:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Kadellar 17:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Common Grass Yellow (Eurema hecabe) butterfly. --AntanO 12:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline The composition is nice, but half of it is out of focus. --Azusa 13:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mono Lake at sunset. --King of Hearts 12:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 13:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mono Lake at sunset. --King of Hearts 12:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --NorbertNagel 18:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mono Lake at sunset. --King of Hearts 12:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 13:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Lagazuoi cableway, in province of Belluno (Italy). --llorenzi 10:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Oversharpened, tilted, sorry --Poco a poco 14:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ventral view of Tailed Jay (Graphium agamemnon). --AntanO 10:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Lack of detail, unsharp, sorry. --JDP90 17:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Buste de Louis Thollon à Ambronay. --Agamitsudo 09:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Sharpness is borderline, but OK from my side. --NorbertNagel 18:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bavaria, Bamberg, Maximliansplatz 8 --Berthold Werner 08:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 15:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 185135 at Manchester Piccadilly. Mattbuck 06:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 15:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination King's Cross. Mattbuck 06:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 11:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Pelophylax cerigensis (by Benny Trapp) --Achim Raschka 06:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 14:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Pelodytes ibericus (by Benny Trapp) --Achim Raschka 06:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 13:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Skutari-Wasserfrosch aus Montenegro (by Benny Trapp) --Achim Raschka 06:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 13:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Triturus carnifex male (by Benny Trapp)) --Achim Raschka 06:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion A little unsharp, but it's great for underwater photography. --Azusa 14:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Small Cupid (Chilades contracta) butterfly. --AntanO 05:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Partially overexposed, blurry --Poco a poco 14:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mahathat Temple, Ayutthaya, Thailand --Poco a poco 05:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 13:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Thammikarat Temple, Ayutthaya, Thailand --Poco a poco 05:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Wihan Yod in Wat Phra Kaew, Bangkok, Thailand --Poco a poco 05:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 15:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ile de Thau Neighbourhood and the Étang de Thau, Sète, France. --Christian Ferrer 05:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI for me --Azusa 13:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Siebenteufelsturm in Haltern am See, Deutschland --XRay 05:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 15:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Grasland with horses (Bauerschaft Leuste, Dülmen) --XRay 05:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 11:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Plateau d'emparis. View Massif de la Meije.--
    Famberhorst 05:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 11:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Plateau d'emparis. View Massif de la Meije.--
    Famberhorst 05:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI --Llorenzi 11:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Balcony in Bad Blankenburg, Thuringia, with holiday feeling
    --Aristeas 05:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Rather noisy and unsharp. --Azusa 13:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ordino. Andorra-185 --Lmbuga 20:54, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ordino. Andorra-184 --Lmbuga 20:54, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 18:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ordino. Andorra-183 --Lmbuga 20:54, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --ArildV 13:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ordino. Andorra-182 --Lmbuga 20:54, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--ArildV 13:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Louvre Museum (by Jastrow) --Paris 16 20:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Very nice.--ArildV 13:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination World War II tombs of nine British aviators in Luxembourg. --Cayambe 19:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --JLPC 14:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Audi Sport quattro concept at IAA 2013 in Frankfurt, Germany --Der Wolf im Wald 19:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --XRay 17:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Matthew church in Mielec --Kroton 19:25, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --XRay 17:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Altar in the Saint Bartholomew church in Nafen Villnöß --Moroder 15:17, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 08:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination St Joseph and the Infant Chrst. Baroque altar in the Church of São Bartolomeu. Vila Viçosa, Portugal. -- Alvesgaspar 15:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 08:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Bartholomew church in Nafen Villnöß --Moroder 13:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 08:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination operating harbor of Danube stream management, Lower Austria --P e z i 20:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 19:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Srila Prabhupada's Bhajan Kutir at ISKCON, Mayapur. --JDP90 18:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
     Info Cropped as suggested by NorbertNagel. --JDP90 14:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion OK for QI --NorbertNagel 19:12, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A native oleander shrub (Nerium oleander), with exposed root system, in Tunisia. --Cayambe 13:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion OK for QI --NorbertNagel 19:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination New Schleissheim Palace, Oberschleissheim, Germany --Poco a poco 19:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC) Comment Needs a more appropriate description --Moroder 23:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
     Done Poco a poco 05:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. Thanks --Moroder 14:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Kamieniec Castle in Odrzykoń, Poland --Kroton 18:03, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Hindenburgdamm to isle Sylt, Germany --Ralf Roletschek 15:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Hindenburgdamm to isle Sylt, Germany --Ralf Roletschek 15:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Abashiri Prison Museum --663highland 13:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review
     Comment Needs a slight CW rotation imo ; QI, then. --JLPC 15:49, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: A jammer during the Roller Derby French Connection III --PierreSelim 06:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Hattandaki Waterfall --663highland 12:12, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment Nice and beautiful. I find it a bit "blueish", and some flares (annotated) should maybe be corrected.--Jebulon 08:20, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 221132 at Gloucester. Mattbuck 10:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn  Comment A little bit unsharp and CA bottom left.--XRay 05:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Santo Stefano a Cennano church near Castelmuzio (Siena) in Italy --Edisonblus 19:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Decline Needs perspective correction. Can you brighten the shadows? Remarkable parts of the building are too dark. --Tuxyso 05:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
     Done Thanks. Hopefully all done. --Edisonblus 21:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
    Shadows are better, but still perspective problems and massive CAs (see notes, I marked only the most visible ones). --Tuxyso 11:16, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
     Not done --Tuxyso 12:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Spanish metal band Noctem at Asaco Metal Fest 2013, Parla, Spain. --Kadellar 13:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Óðinn 15:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Calla with beautifully drawn leaf.--
    Famberhorst 15:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
    I'm not convinced by the focus. Mattbuck 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Two different Hamomag tractors at Oldtimer meet-up -- Achim Raschka 05:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review Contrast way too high - may be fixable. Mattbuck 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Mascaron on Maison du bailli, in Granges-le-Bourg, France. --ComputerHotline 11:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC) Comment If you keep the windows it needs a perspective correction and maybe a better crop imo--Moroder 11:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Review needed

Consensual review

File:Beach_of_Carlsbad_2013.jpg

• Nomination Beach of Carlsbad in California --Tuxyso 12:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline  Oppose lacking sharpness, tilted horizon at the left --A.Savin 14:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  Let's discuss. I see neither missing sharpness nor a tilt. Can you please specify the direction of the tilt? --Tuxyso 14:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)  Info for tilt, look at the sea level --Christian Ferrer 15:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
   DonePlease take another look. --Tuxyso 15:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)  Neutral ok for tilt, but DOF seem a bit low, anyway I'm not sure --Christian Ferrer 16:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC) Oppose Sorry but its not QI imo. Lack of details, a lot of noise in the sky and water (even colour noise). Unfortunately, I do not think you can save the image (it's already traces of over sharpening, look at the bird)--ArildV 16:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
   Done Please take another look. I've downscaled to 2 MP and now see no reason why this should not meet QI criteria. --Tuxyso 07:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)  Support it looks ok for me now --Christian Ferrer 09:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

 Comment Sorry, but Im still oppose. When I review pictures here, it's all about quality. Downscaling does not increase the quality. Size is in one sense one of the parameters, I think for example that it would be unfair and wrong to deny a 36mp image that looks amazing downscaled to 10mp because of noise, but promote an image scaled down to 2mp. But noise for example, is not a technical error. Despite over sharpening, and other attempts to save the image is the technical shortcomings obvious here (lack of details, the sea looks terrible, sharpening halos). I'm a little surprised, I was expecting more of the camera.--ArildV 07:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:45, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Schmausenschloss_(Mogeldorf).jpg

• Nomination Шмаузеншлосс в Могельдорфе (Нюрнберг)-Schmausenschloss in Mögeldorf (Nürnberg) --Vitold Muratov 19:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline  Oppose Sorry, see notes: CAs, Perspective distortion and perhaps tilted, poor detail, overexposed areas, noise, and perhaps a big spot--Lmbuga 19:08, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  "Discuss" because comments in my user talk page--Lmbuga 21:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose CA, somewhat oversharpened, slightly overexposed, strange artifacts on down right corner. -- Smial 16:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:40, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Prichsenstadt_BW_2013-06-20_09-38-49.JPG

• Nomination Bavaria, Prichsenstadt, Schmiedgasse 1 --Berthold Werner 07:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion  Comment Good composition but very disturbing dark shadows. -- Spurzem 22:40, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support OK I think/ Mattbuck 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support No loss in details in shadowy parts. -- Smial 16:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support In my view OK; good detail level --High Contrast 19:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Berthold Werner 10:43, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Grande_Mosquée_de_Sousse,_30_septembre_2013,_(24).jpg

• Nomination Grande Mosquée, Sousse --Dyolf77 00:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Overall maybe too noisy/unsharp. Can you correct it?--Dirtsc 21:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
   Done I tried, thanks for reviewing. Dyolf77 11:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  Unsharp. Mattbuck 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  I'm not sure about the last point, lets have more opinions. --Dirtsc 06:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
  I agree it's unsharp. --Bahnfrend 13:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
   Oppose Unsharp + little red CA --Christian Ferrer 12:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:37, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Grande_Mosquée_de_Sousse,_30_septembre_2013,_(36).jpg

• Nomination Grande Mosquée, Sousse --Dyolf77 00:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline slightly tilted CCW --Dirtsc 21:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
   Done --Dyolf77 11:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  Unsharp. Mattbuck 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
  I'm not sure about the last point, lets have more opinions. --Dirtsc 06:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
  I agree it's unsharp. --Bahnfrend 13:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
   Oppose Unsharp + little red CA --Christian Ferrer 12:15, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Gran_Palacio,_Bangkok,_Tailandia,_2013-08-22,_DD_52.jpg

• Nomination Grand Palace, Bangkok, Thailand --Poco a poco 09:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline f/7.1 not appropriate for a architecture photo with foreground and backround. --NorbertNagel 11:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  Well, the result matters, isn't it? and to me the sharpness of the items in the foreground looks okay apart from the items below the camera (fence with flowers). If that is a must, I can crop it Poco a poco 11:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  Well, the arc on the top is also quite blurred, but let's hear other opinions. --NorbertNagel 11:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
   Weak support. QI IMO--Lmbuga 14:42, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Perspective distortion, blurred foreground and arc. --Vamps 14:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Mainau_-_Kirche_St_Marien_-_Decke_&_Stuck_003.jpg

• Nomination The church "St. Marien" at Mainau. Stucco and coat of arms of the Grandmaster of the Teutonic Knights, Clemens August I. from Bavaria. --Mummelgrummel 04:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Nice picture, could be promotted. Identification is a mandatory in QIC for species, minerals etc... I think it should be the same for whatever is identifiable, like coats of arms. Could you please identify the owner ? (There are some clues in the blazon itself. I've found the answer...)--Jebulon 09:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
   Done I found the naming of this coat of arms and added it. I hope, so it ist o.K. --Mummelgrummel 04:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, very good !--Jebulon 09:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose - not sharp. Mattbuck 10:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose f/2,8 was clearly not enough. --Vamps 14:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Wat_Pho,_Bangkok,_Tailandia,_2013-08-22,_DD_16.jpg

• Nomination Wat Pho temple, Bangkok, Thailand --Poco a poco 21:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Blur top left. --Mattbuck 16:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
   Improved with new crop, and perspective correction, the top left element plays no relevant role in the composition, and therefore it shouldn't be a problem if it is not sharp Poco a poco 22:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose Sky a bit overexposed (leafs are half-burned on the right), distracting blurred part on the left. --Vamps 14:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Escultura_a_F._Soage_Villarino_de_Francisco_Asorey_en_Cangas._1925._Galiza.jpg

• Nomination Garden with the sculpture of Soage Villarino by Francisco Asorey, Cangas, Galicia (Spain) --Lmbuga 18:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion The composition is just very messy I think. DoF too deep. --Mattbuck 16:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  Sorry, I disagree. Let's discuss. Why (or where) is it very messy?--Lmbuga 00:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  New data and new text of the proposal. If the subject is the garden (also the trees) the DOF is not too deep IMO--Lmbuga 00:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  {{Withdrawn}} It's only a picture. No problem--Lmbuga 00:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)  Support For me it' a QI --Christian Ferrer 21:22, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
  Ok, "discuss", but, now, I'm not sure because the mother and the children of the background are a bit disturbing--Lmbuga 12:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  Certainly it is not a FP, but the subject is clearly visible and recognizable and I see none major defects --Christian Ferrer 15:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Weak support ok. --Vamps 14:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 20:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Hauptplatz_Friesach_from_Weißer_Wolf.jpg

• Nomination Main square of Friesach. In the background the parish church St. Bartholomäus. --Herzi Pinki 12:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose unsharp, fat sharpening halo around the tower. poor light --A.Savin 13:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
• Weak  Support The sharpening could be done much more sophisticated, yes. But the lighting is not poor, instead it shows very beautiful the atmosphere of early morning light. There are no hard shadows at the facades that would hide detail. -- Smial 07:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful and vivid image with good sharpness. --Steindy 20:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
• Weak  Support ok. --Vamps 14:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 20:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Olena_Tsibulska_(DakhaBrakha)_(Haldern_Pop_2013)_IMGP6613_smial_wp.jpg

• Nomination Olena Tsibulska (Олена Цибульська) of DakhaBrakha at Haldern Pop Festival 2013. --Smial 09:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline  Oppose unfavorable light, noise, messy background --A.Savin 10:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  I disagree I believe the result is not too bad, given the actual lighting situation --Smial 10:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  QI imo. --Kadellar 16:18, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry, but because of the unfavorable light it is no QI. -- Spurzem 18:46, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Unfavorable light and irradiated background. --Steindy 20:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Kruszwica kolegiata śś. Piotra i Pawła(WLZ13).JPG

• Nomination: Saints Peter and Paul collegiate church in Kruszwica, Poland --1bumer 18:49, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
• Review Slightly tilted, can you fix that please? --Kadellar 17:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
   Done Better? --1bumer 16:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  Lovely. Mattbuck 16:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
  Still tilted (there was a message on user's talk page) --Kadellar 19:24, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 20:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Casa_de_los_Abades_de_Pelplin,_Gdansk,_Polonia,_2013-05-20,_DD_08.jpg

• Nomination House of the Abbots of Pelplin, Gdansk, Poland --Poco a poco 18:29, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion Bit too much contract on the low end I think. Mattbuck 19:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  Didn't get you, sorry, what do you mean? Poco a poco 20:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  Just brighten the low levels. Mattbuck 19:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
   Not done Mattbuck 21:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)  Done Just on time!, sorry, I missed your comment Poco a poco 22:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  Hm, better but I'm not sold. The right side is a bit blurry, and looks to be suffering overexposure. I'll let CR people decide. Mattbuck 15:54, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Good enough, one dust spot on the right top. --Vamps 14:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

  I don't think it was a dust spot, but anyhow, gone! Poco a poco 14:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 20:25, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Dlijia_San_Genesio_La_Val_01.JPG

• Nomination Parish church in La Val --Moroder 06:13, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion  Support ok --Christian Ferrer 06:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
   Comment In my opinion the picture is gloomy and the crop below is too tight. Further it seems to be a little bit lop-sided. I ask for discussion. -- Spurzem 22:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Vamps 14:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 20:24, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:13-05-05 Oldtimerteffen Liblar Porsche weiss 01.jpg

• Nomination Whtite Porsche 912 at Oldtimer meet-up -- Achim Raschka 05:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Good quality.--ArildV 08:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
   Comment Entschuldigung, aber ich bin nicht begeistert. Das Auto sollte ins Bild hineinfahren, d. h. links etwas mehr Abstand zum Rand, rechts weniger. Außerdem sind die Konturen der Tür, des Kofferraumdeckels und der Tankklappe zum Teil nur schwer erkennbar (schwierige Lichtverhältnisse!). Und was mich sehr stört, ist das Informationsblatt an der Windschutzscheibe. -- Spurzem 22:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Overexposed --Christian Ferrer 21:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Cerkiew_w_Milejczycach.JPG

• Nomination Orthodox church in Milejczyce, Poland (by Adam Falkowski --Winiar 21:13, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Oppose Overprocessed --Smial 22:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support I see no overprocessing here. Let's discuss. --Tuxyso 07:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose with Dirtsc - I did not see the cloning artefacts. From a documentary point of view removing of cables is problematic.--Tuxyso 08:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose Judging from the darkness of the blue sky, heavy tone mapping has been applied. See the bright halo around the tree. Looks entirely unnatural to me. --Kreuzschnabel 14:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

There seems also to be some remains of cabling. See note. Where did they come from, where did they go to? -- Smial 19:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Support --Christian Ferrer 05:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose Dirtsc irs right, I change my vote --Christian Ferrer 15:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose There are at least three remnants of objects, that have been retouched. Please compare to [this] image. And the colors are quite strange. --Dirtsc 14:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Canon RC-6 Wireless Remote Control 02.jpg

• Nomination A Canon Remote Control, taken by an EOS600D. --Varmin 15:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Good quality. --Cayambe 08:06, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
  * In my opinion there is too much dirt around the object. Additionally, the picture is not very sharp. --Florian Fuchs 06:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  * I can remove the dirt aroud the objet with the gimp, is it better ? --Varmin 11:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  The dirt is almost gone now. However, the picture still is not very sharp. --Florian Fuchs 14:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  I made some little modifications with the sharpness, but for me it's sharp, except for the little triangle in the top of the remote (because low f and focus on the "canon" logo). --Varmin 15:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
   Oppose The problem is the triangle. In my opinion you should do the shot again and either use a different aperture or try focus stacking. --Florian Fuchs 05:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:King's Cross railway station MMB 78.jpg

• Nomination King's Cross station. Mattbuck 08:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Underexposed --Colin 21:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
  Fixed Mattbuck 21:40, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose The lower part of the hall is still underexposed. --Steindy 19:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:15, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Elvas September 2013-32.jpg

• Nomination View in the city of Elvas, Portugal -- Alvesgaspar 22:34, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Oppose I would crop tighter at the top. Slightly burnt highlights. --Tuxyso 22:39, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
• Only the blue channel is slightly blown. In don't agree with the crop. To CR, then! :)
•  Oppose The image has slight blur and appears to be processed broken, which is visible on the fence in the background. --Steindy 20:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
• Weak  Support Sharpness is not overwhelming, probably due to f/16, and perspective maybe not perfectly corrected. But it's ok for QI. And wtf is the problem with this (safety?) fence? This is 3D profiled mesh and so some parts are not directly in the sun and seem to disappear against the background, that's all. -- Smial 22:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 20:14, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Milton Keynes Central railway station MMB 12 377208.jpg

• Nomination 377208 at Milton Keynes. Mattbuck 09:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline  Oppose too harsh shadow --A.Savin 13:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
  Shadows brightened. Mattbuck 08:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
  Don't think you can recover this -- the lighting is just too harsh. -- Colin 21:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose. Sorry. But the shadow is too dark. -- Spurzem 22:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose The dark shadow is horrible. --Steindy 19:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Steindy 19:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Marius_Chivu_at_Göteborg_Book_Fair_2013_01.jpg

• Nomination Marius Chivu at Göteborg Book Fair 2013. --ArildV 06:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion Declined slight noise in dark areas, POF not on eye, nose unsharp --P e z i 14:15, 28 September 2013 (UTC) As far as i can see, the POF is on the eyes and the sharpness is imo good enough for QI. Did you think "slight noise" is a reason to decline photos taken indoors? --ArildV 17:03, 28 September 2013 (UTC)  Comment I've set it to Discussion. Let's have additional reviews. --P e z i 18:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
   Support OK for me. I would in contrary say that NR a even slightly too strong. BTW: I would try to brighten the area around the eyes. --Tuxyso 09:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
   Support --JLPC 15:52, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

 Support No real noise problem. Sharpness is not perfectly on the eyes, but absolutely acceptable for a non studio shot. -- Smial 07:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC) (who prefers f/4 ;-))

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 20:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Death_Valley_Bad_Water_Basin_03_2013.jpg

• Nomination View from Bad Water Basin in Death Valley --Tuxyso 00:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion Darker spot in the sky (dust on sensor?) that could be removed. Image might be cropped to remove a bit of the somewhat too bright soil, in an application of the rule of thirds. --Tufta 20:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
  It is somehow unusual to decline directly when there are minor issues which can be corrected easily (like crop or dust spots). Thus I changed to discuss and will upload a new version soon. --Tuxyso 23:49, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
   Done Dust spots removed. Rule of third (+ diagonal lines) was massively used, I composed the image very carefully. Please take a look on the image notes. BTW: Also if I had not used rule of thirds that hat not been an QI issue. --Tuxyso 01:07, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
   Support QI for me. Pleclown 08:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
   Support --JLPC 15:54, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

 Support I do not know the "real" colours, but would expect the whites somewhat brighter in full sunshine. -- Smial 07:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Meiner Erinnerung nach passt das aber recht gut. Es kann aber sein, dass das Foto generell etwas dunkler wirkt, weil ich einen Polfilter benutzt habe. --Tuxyso 14:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Das war eher als Rückfrage gedacht, das Bild ist auch so sehr gut. Luc hat irgendwann mal Salzbilder gezeigt, wo das Weiß halt mehr strahlte. -- Smial 18:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Support Die Berge im Hintergrund könnten etwas schärfer sein, aber für QI reicht es allemal. --Steindy 19:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support all in all ok --High Contrast 18:30, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Steindy 19:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Benediktinerstift Altenburg-DSC 3067w.jpg

• Nomination Benedictin Monastery, Altenburg, Austria --P e z i 23:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Comment The dark areas of the right are a bit noisy. Slight dust spot (see note)--Lmbuga 01:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Done dust spot removed --P e z i 13:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
• Too dark sky. --Kadellar 13:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support QI IMO--Lmbuga 21:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
• CR, because of the sky. --Kadellar 10:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment worked on sky; better? --P e z i 16:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, better, but isn't it too soft? Could you increase sharpness somehow? I'm sorry I didn't see this when I first commented. --Kadellar 18:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Uploaded a sharpened version - please could you have a look? --P e z i 23:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
      • Well, a bit soft, but ok. --Kadellar 19:30, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support The last version seem ok --Christian Ferrer 19:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Steindy 19:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Steindy 19:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Roberto_Fico_2013.JPG

• Nomination Roberto Fico, Italian politician. --Jaqen 13:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion Good quality for me. Pymouss 14:04, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
  The shirt is overexposed and actually glowing. Mattbuck 14:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support good portrait, qi to me. --Ralf Roletschek 14:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 20:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Andreas Prommegger - Tag des Sports 2013 Wien.jpg

• Nomination: Andreas Prommegger. --Tsui 13:31, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
• Review Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 14:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
  Shirt appears overexposed. Mattbuck 14:59, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 20:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Jaeger-LeCoultre_Polo_Masters_2013_-_31082013_-_Final_match_Poloyou_vs_Lynx_Energy_3.jpg

• Nomination: Jaeger-LeCoultre Polo Masters 2013 - 31082013 - Final match Poloyou vs Lynx Energy --Pleclown 11:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
• Review Roars the image and the colors in the background are flooded. I do not understand why you need ISO 800 in bright sunshine. --Steindy 13:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  To stop the action. As you can see I'm at 1/3200 and the pictures can be blurry because of action. Polo is a very fast game. Pleclown 18:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  Faster than Formula 1 Rallye, football or handball? I can not believe it! --Steindy 19:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  faster than football or handball, without any doubt. I don't know about F1, but a galloping horse is fast, and a stick even faster. Pleclown 20:59, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  I can not see any issue with ISO800, no visible noise. The lens has an ugly bokeh, and we have a slight overexposure. Please discuss. --Smial 13:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 20:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Jaeger-LeCoultre_Polo_Masters_2013_-_31082013_-_Final_match_Poloyou_vs_Lynx_Energy_22.jpg

• Nomination: Jaeger-LeCoultre Polo Masters 2013 - 31082013 - Final match Poloyou vs Lynx Energy --Pleclown 11:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
• Review Roars the image and the colors in the background are flooded. I do not understand why you need ISO 800 in bright sunshine. --Steindy 13:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  
•  Support I disagree No problem with ISO800. --Smial 13:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --A.Savin 19:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Calvaire à Saint Silouane.jpg

• Nomination Calvaire in the Monastery of Saint Silouane --Massalim 18:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion *  Oppose Not a Commoner. --King of Hearts 07:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
  Invalid decline; author is a Commoner. --Óðinn 01:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Good to me.--Jebulon 19:31, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support QI to me. --Cayambe 14:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 14:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Ciasa_Sompunt_porta_de_ciule.jpg

• Nomination Door to the cellar in the manor "Sompunt" in Badia --Moroder 15:05, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion QI --P e z i 18:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose unsharp, sorry.--Jebulon 19:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Sharpness is perfectly acceptable for me, especially given the 36 MP. --King of Hearts 20:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support These high resolution cameras show the smallest flaws of any lens. The same lens with the same conditions on a camera with 6 or 12 MPix would produce perfectly sharp images at 100% view. This image scaled down to 12 or even 6 MPix will also be perfectly sharp. But it would loose much detail. So we have the choice: Full resolution uploads with minor unsharpness at 100% view, but with the possibility to make enhanced versions or crops based on full resolution, or scaled down versions, which seem to be somewhat sharper, but with much less detail. I believe, images with about 6 MPixels are good enough for most real world purposes, but declining an image because of minor(!) problems which would disappear by simply downscaling it to 6 MPix, is not ok. -- Smial 08:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
• Weak  Oppose per Jebulon. --Iifar 09:55, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Sharpness adjusted. -- Smial 11:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment I should think imho that if you see from the picture what tipe of screws were used to fix the hinges, the sharpness is good enough --Moroder 14:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support I'm agreeing to user:Smial. Had the same ideas behind my promotion. --P e z i 09:04, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
•  CommentDownsampling does not make a picture sharper nor better... It just hides the issue...--Jebulon 23:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

  But people with lower-resolution cameras, such as a D40, have no choice but to "hide the issue"; their camera does that for them whether they like it or not. And yet we have plenty of QIs and even FPs taken on a D40. -- King of Hearts 07:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

  Agree to King of Hearts. My 12-24mm zoom performed excellent on my old *istDs besides some easy removable CA. On the k5 it shows some softness with full resolution. Is the lens today worse than a couple of years ago? No, if I resize to 6MPix, the images are as good as before, or even better because of better noise level of the K5. This has nothing to do with "hiding". --Smial 20:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Question Is author ok with so strong downsampling? --Vamps 09:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

• I reverted to the full size version - Commons provides by default smaller versions if someone prefers them --Moroder 17:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Support QI for me. With two megapixels is a perfect image. Maybe could be useful to consider changing the rules of QI--Lmbuga 21:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC) Thanks to Vamps--Lmbuga 21:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Steindy 19:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Steindy 19:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Valley_View_Yosemite_August_2013_002.jpg

• Nomination Valley View, Yosemite National Park. --King of Hearts 08:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support QI imo, nice view.--ArildV 09:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose It is nice, definitely. But I would like to discuss about the focus point. For me the rocks are not really sharp and they belong to the overall motive and are not only background.  Question Can you remember the focus point? For such shots the use of hyperfocal distance could be helpful. Probably the focus point was too close to the camera standpoint. The unsharpness of the rocks could also come from foggy air. --Tuxyso 13:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

  I just used autofocus on a D5100, which generally chooses the closest thing in a central diamond region, which I estimate is about 10 m. --King of Hearts 20:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Support To me the image looks good enough for QI. Btw, the hyperfocal distance - for the settings applied according to the exif data - would be 1.45m ... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner 16:56, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

  The grass is very close, maybe focus is on the grass bush on the right. --Tuxyso 20:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

• Weak  Support Imo it meets the QI criteria. --Vamps 10:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 16:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Upper_Antelope_Canyon_People_2013.jpg

• Nomination Upper Antelope Canyon with people inside --Tuxyso 21:55, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support looks good for me --Rjcastillo 00:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice to see a non-standard picture of Antelope Canyon! But I'd like to discuss the sky section, which looks darkened too much and has odd fringes (some CA(!), some due to the local contrast changes. --Dschwen 02:08, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
  

It's an HDR! After five further attempts the one I've uploaded now is imho the best one. For me more than  Done. What do you think? --Tuxyso 12:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Support for the new version --Cayambe 16:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Steindy 19:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 16:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Upper_Antelope_Canyon_Entry_2013.jpg

• Nomination Entry to Upper Antelope Canyon nearby Page --Tuxyso 18:51, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion  SupportGood quality. --JDP90 19:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
•  OpposePlease correct the fringe due to overexposition in the central upper part.--Jebulon 21:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Can you please precisely mark it with the note tool? I have only a single RAW shot here, no HDR. BTW: Slight overexposure with Antelope Canyon should not be a reason for decline. The bright area is is neglectable due to its size. Look at the other photos in the appropriate category. --Tuxyso 22:21, 23 September 2013 (UTC)  Done? I made some local corrections. Please take another look. --Tuxyso 22:30, 23 September 2013 (UTC) I'm sorry. I've annotated as requested. Easily fixable, IMO.--Jebulon 09:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC) How? If you like: Feel free to fix it. I mostly work with Lightroom. --Tuxyso 12:09, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Support Jebulon, this is not FPC ;-)--Berthold Werner 17:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
  • As I often say and write here, it is a common mistake to think that "FP" means "technicaly better than QI"...;)--Jebulon 23:15, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support. May be. But in my opinion it is absolutely enough for QI and nearly excellent. -- Spurzem 09:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I am on Jebulon's side that we should stick to quality criteria. He is also right that there could be FPs which have not chance on QI, like File:USA_Antelope-Canyon.jpg. But it is essential to judge every image with an individual weighting of quality aspects. Example: If you are directly in front of a high building you cannot expect straight verticals for QI. If you do indoor concert shots you cannot expect an image with zero noise. If you photograph a bird in flight you cannot expect 1/200sec at ISO 200 (although you are using a 100mm lens). If you have tiny bright spots (e.g. street lamps on a night shot) you cannot expect that these lamps are not overexposed. In the case of the canyon it is the same as with the street lamps. For me is makes no sense to strongly stick to the criterion (no overexposed parts) if there is no way to photograph such an image without tiny overexposed parts. The bright spots are about >9 f-stops as the brightness inside the canyon - thus even HDR does not help in every case. --Tuxyso 09:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

•  Support OK for QI. --NorbertNagel 20:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Steindy 19:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 16:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Eichhörnchen_Düsseldorf_Hofgarten_edit.jpg

• Nomination squirrel, Sciurus_vulgaris by User:Ray_eye --Jean11 15:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 21:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Below 2 MP, not meeting current QI criteria, despite FP status from 2007. --Yerpo 18:38, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support 1792 x 1216 = 2.18 MP. --King of Hearts 07:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support. Die Megapixel sollten nicht darüber entscheiden, ob ein Bild gut ist oder nicht. Meiner Meinung nach ist das Eichhörnchen hervorragend getroffen. -- Spurzem 12:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC) 12:17, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support als grober Anhalstwert sind Megapixel brauchbar, als Kriterium nicht. Es gibt 1,3 MP Superbilder ebenso wie 20 MP Schrott. --Ralf Roletschek 13:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Only the head and front legs are clear. For an animal of that size is not good: f/4.8 is a bad choice. --Archaeodontosaurus 08:18, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
• Weak  Oppose just above minimum 2 Mp and it's not very sharp. --Vamps 09:51, 29 September 2013 (UTC)Please don't use such unofficial templates: the QI bot does not recognize them. Thanks.--Jebulon 15:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nicht genug scharf, für mich.--Jebulon 15:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice, but it's not a quality image IMO: poor DOF and too little with this DOF--Lmbuga 20:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Sorry, I can't understand the last four votes. The photo was the 3rd place at Picture of the Year 2007 and is a featured picture in six WPns. Are they all wrong? NO! Please do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point! --Steindy 18:48, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Please consider the conditions: it was a fast moving object, obviously photographed from a small distance with not much light. The face of the squirrel is sharp, the colours are natural, the background is beautiful for this object. So it is QI for me. --Dirtsc 06:07, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Poor quality. Cute is not a criterion for QI. Biopics 09:50, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Fine moment and composition but the result lacks quality: even at the small size given (which is barely above QI threshold) the loss of detail due to noise reduction (e.g. in the fur below its head) is obvious. --Kreuzschnabel 18:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → More votes?   --Cayambe 07:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Pfarrmesner_in_St._Peter_03.JPG

• Nomination Sacristan's home in the parish Saint Peter in Villnöß --Moroder 12:04, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Lack of fine detail. --Mattbuck 19:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
  I disagree. Looks like you've run out of arguments --Moroder 21:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Cayambe 15:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Fine details enough. --Steindy 18:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 15:53, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Clifton Down railway station MMB 15 150221.jpg

• Nomination Passengers at Clifton Down. Mattbuck 06:58, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion
• Identifiable people --P e z i 14:18, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
  • That is not a QI criteria. Mattbuck 17:14, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment Shadows too dark for me, can you lighten them up a bit? --Kreuzschnabel 05:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

   Done Mattbuck 08:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

  •  Support now --Kreuzschnabel 17:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Christian Ferrer 15:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 19:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Liverpool Street station MMB 20.jpg

• Nomination Liverpool Street station. Mattbuck 14:50, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
• Promotion Seems a little bit unsharp. --Dirtsc 07:28, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
  Looks sharp to me. Mattbuck 19:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
   Support ok for me --Christian Ferrer 12:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
•  ok --Vamps 09:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
  •  ok --High Contrast 19:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 19:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Panorama_unweit_Matrei_in_Osttirol.JPG

• Nomination Panorama unweit Matrei in Osttirol --Steinsplitter 20:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
• Decline Lack of fine detail, overexposed foreground thingy. --Mattbuck 19:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  Level of detail is marginally OK for me, but the disturbing foreground should be cropped out. --Kreuzschnabel 05:58, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
  uploaded a new version --Steinsplitter 20:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support - better now. Óðinn 18:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
• Weak  Oppose Still lack of fine detail. --Vamps 09:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)These kind of unofficial templates cannot be used in QIC page: the bot does not recognize them. Please avoid using them, thanks.--Jebulon 14:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Question Have you got the RAW and can try it with much less NR? IMHO noise reduction has killed several details. --Tuxyso 13:30, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

no, (habe die RAW leider nicht mehr) :-( --Steinsplitter 18:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

•  Support Fine details enough. --Steindy 19:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose as others. Biopics 09:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose - blurred. Mattbuck 19:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)