Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2014 at 15:35:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support Impressive subject and resolution. The post-processing of the image isn't perfect but the result is still exceptional enough for FP. Would appreciate some information on the image page about camera/lens, number of frames, software used, etc -- these things all help our educational mission. -- Colin (talk) 10:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Past-processing not perfect, Colin? There are extreme purple CAs on the background silhouette and all around the trees on the rocks. There are also artefacts of oversharpening at the sky area. I am missing a clear compositional idea - surely the rocks are impressive but imho arranged in a random way. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:16, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tuxyso I am aware of the CA and noise and other imperfections at 100%, but this is also a 88MP image. If I stick it into IrfanView and resize it to 50% with a little sharpening I get a 22MP image that would rival anything a pro Canon DSLR can produce even with the best glass. Are you punishing the guy for uploading the full size image rather than heavily downsizing? Sure he could improve on this - but I don't know what software he's using or if he can afford anything better. Perhaps the camera/lens isn't that good. The rocks are arranged in a row and I think you'll have to have a word with God about his "random" arrangement :-). I've no idea if there is a better viewpoint but this one does show the formation in good detail, along with pleasant hills in the background - taken at a time of day/lighting when those hills are attractive silhouettes. -- Colin (talk) 15:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Colin, I have no complaints with stitchings which are not tack sharp at 100% due to non-downscaling. But a non-downscaled image is no excuse for inattentive processing. Sharpening artefacts and strong CAs are serious concerns especially if we speak of an FPC. My comment on the composition and its randomness was related to the way the rocks were photographed. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bei einer Ansicht von 200% sehe ich auch das Problem, nicht jedoch bei 100%. Das ist marginal, nicht der Rede Wert. Eines möchte ich jedoch nicht verschweigen: die letzte winzige ab 150% sichtbare CA bekomme ich nicht herausgerechnet. Das müsste schon der Upöoader bei den Einzelbildern durchführen. Aber es ist: nur eine unbedeutende Winzigkeit. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Probably we look at different files. I do not review images at 200% view. Take a simple look on this 100% crop - these purple CAs are all around the mountains in the background and don't tell me these are "marginal". --Tuxyso (talk) 16:06, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The chromatic aberrations are quite notable especially on the right but also on the left. They are possible to fix. I wonder if the white balance is ok. The photo seems quite... yellowish. Is it like that for real? --Ximonic (talk) 16:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2014 at 01:23:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kallady Bridge Batticaloa.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kallady Bridge Batticaloa.jpg
Opposechromatic aberration, overprocessed, poor detail, low resolution and uninteresting composition of 95 % blue areas, sorry – the sky would be much more interesting with some clouds in it :-) Try to shift the horizon out of center next time. Either more sky or more ground, but 50:50 is a boring view in most cases. And I’d suggest to consult QIC before putting up a nomination here – an image failing QIC would have to be very special to success here. --Kreuzschnabel10:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice, but to much sky and to much water. The bridge is to small. A panorama of several images will be a better option for this kind of images. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2014 at 16:56:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kościół Narodzenia NMP 07.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kościół Narodzenia NMP 07.JPG
Comment Not a Diliff but not too bad either :-) There’s a perspective problem though. The chain of the chandelier is not vertical though I am pretty sure it ought to be. --Kreuzschnabel19:58, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Although I would have liked to see it a bit brighter and with more of the foreground seating (which would then require a panorama). Diliff (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 10:40:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Sorry, I don’t get the idea behind this picture. There’s a pond mostly obstructed by plants, a building partly obstructed by trees obstructing each other, and the only thing not hidden is cropped off. What’s the subject? --Kreuzschnabel16:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 07:57:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Cultural Heritage Preservation Institute of Belgrade by night.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cultural Heritage Preservation Institute of Belgrade by night.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 06:14:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Megachile incerta male 1.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Megachile incerta male 1.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 17:53:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Parasols, Evening, Beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Parasols, Evening, Beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 11:08:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 12:18:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Pont sur l'Orb, Roquebrun.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pont sur l'Orb, Roquebrun.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 06:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment The file's description is insufficient for me: Where was the picture taken? What does Rekha Raju mean? Is that her name? Then something like The Indian (?) Mohiniyattam dancer Rekha Raju performing at XY theater would be appropriate. --El Grafo (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 1. for size – a picture barely above the minimum requirement has to be very special for me to support. 2. The floor before her feet looks heavily cloned and softened/smeared. At the lower right of her, there’s a sharp piece among blurred ones. That does not work, sorry. Additionally, there’s considerable chromatic aberration in her hair decoration. The shot and pose as such is really very nice but IMHO it’s not among the very best Commons has to offer for the reasons given. --Kreuzschnabel16:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 13:27:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Tyto alba - Cetrería - 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tyto alba - Cetrería - 01.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 14:11:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:금동약사불입상.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:금동약사불입상.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 20:31:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/Image:Fijian soldier runs up the Masada Snake Path.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Fijian soldier runs up the Masada Snake Path.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 11:09:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Södersjukhuset September 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Södersjukhuset September 2014.jpg
InfoSödersjukhuset, constructed between 1937 and 1944, is one of the largest hospitals in Stockholm and has the largest emergency department in northern Europe. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 11:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2014 at 13:37:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose per Alchemist-hp. It is hard to take an unattractive photograph of a hot air balloon, or of flames. Needs more than this to be FP. -- Colin (talk) 19:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination - Thanks for the comments, I can see this isn't going to pass. I'm still learning quite what does have a chance at FP, so all comments are useful. Except those which aren't, but there weren't any of those here. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:03, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 10:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 15:21:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Kłodzko, ul. Grottgera 17.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Kłodzko, ul. Grottgera 17.JPG
Oppose There’s something about the sky I don’t like. The colour is too blazing, too bright and saturated, and there’s a bright seam along the skyline on the roofs as if there has been severe manipulation.. --Kreuzschnabel17:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. And I don't even care too much whether it's processed or not - the strong saturation is not pleasing to look at and distracts from the rest of the image, so it would make sense to reduce the saturation here imo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files)18:32, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Still a bright seam along the roofs, and the previousw colouring still shines through the leaves on the left. What’s worse, there’s now a posterized zone in the sky, see annotation. --Kreuzschnabel20:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 14:07:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kurkocin, wiatrak (WLZ14).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kurkocin, wiatrak (WLZ14).jpg
Support Nice view, nice colours and nice atmosphere. No problem with the shadow. Everything is good to see, even in the shadow part. Light from behind would make this special atmosphere as he have here. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The light might not be the best, on the other hand I am nearly bored by all those it-never-rains-in-california-bright-sunlight images. This picture is perfectly composed with the cyan and green areas, and the mill’s center of gravity near the rule-of-thirds while its face turned away is looking far out of the frame, catching my eye. At least it’s an awesome example for well-done simplicity. And … though this alone is never enough for me to support … it’s nice and I like it :-) --Kreuzschnabel15:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kreuzschnabel: Is it unfortunate coincidence that above and beneath this nomination are two pictures from California in bright sunlight? I hope you are not bored by my images. The Californian people can't help for the good weather. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Coincidence indeed. I do not blame the Californians. And I really didn’t realize this context – hard to believe, I know, the california line came to my mind when I was thinking of a suitable illustration --Kreuzschnabel21:16, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 19:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Spanish Civil War - Mass grave - Estépar, Burgos.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Spanish Civil War - Mass grave - Estépar, Burgos.jpg
Support Excellent and very impressive. Do you know if there are nationalist, or republican victims ? Did they have been shot ? Some corpses look like if they have wrists bound back...--Jebulon (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
CommentDear Jebulon. In this case, only Republicans were assassinated, or saying in a better way, non-fascists. There were also some Nationalist's massacre in Paracuellos del Jarama, in Madrid. But in this case, primarily Republicans. And to your second question. Although this image has not the better angle shot, some of the skulls have in their back a hole, and in some cases, we could identify the bullets inside them. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even if I'm not sure that the word "fascist" is good for the spanish extreme right wing, so-called "nationalists" (no matter, it is a long discussion...), I thank you very much for this very interesting informations. I'm very interested by spanish history, and by the story of the Civil War. It seems that you were present during this excavation, and that there is another grave at right ? Do you think these victims could be identified ? --Jebulon (talk) 11:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. We can discuss for a long time about the term fascist applied for Spanish Nationalists. Anyway, I was there, participating for two days in the field season. And there are at least 4 mass graves there, that one you can see in the upper right corner, another one which is further, and another one on the left, which is still not excavated. Experts are planning to dig it next year. What I can tell you is that in the three mass graves already excavated, 70 people were identified. Forensic anthropologists took the skeletons to the lab and effectively they are trying to identify each of them, to give, if exists nowdays, to their families. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry to spoil the party – without doubt it’s impressive and of highest historical value, but in the present form the composition looks rather random to me, and not yet the best possible representation. In the first place, I’d crop out the unneccessary and disturbing dark parts on both sides, showing the grave only. Then, I don’t like the slant perspective making some of the numbers unreadable, I think a more upside-down view onto the grave would show more detail. --Kreuzschnabel10:46, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks in advance for your comment Kreuzschnabel. I can sure you the image was not taken randomly. In the four faces of the mass grave, the only place where I was able to take it 1.5 metres above the level of the grave was in the place where I was taking it. If I were close to the limit of the grave, never mind in which side, even standing up my arms and taken the picture downwards, the whole grave would had never been photographed completely in all of its surface. In fact, I took also these pictures, but the complete surface of the grave did not appeared, and I prefered, effectively, to take the picture with the whole surface of the grave. I was not able to fly a dron to take pictures orthogonally. I am sure the photograph taken from this dron would be better than the image we are commenting, but unfortunately I haven't got it. But thanks in advance. In this way, I would improve my photography to meet your requirements. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 14:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for your answer. I’d find it much more suitable for instance had the grave only – from the same point – been photographed in portrait orientation, giving higher resolution on the horrible details. I will not doubt its encaclopedial or historical/political value. --Kreuzschnabel15:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for being so reasonable. Undoubtedly, I will upload more images of these and other mass graves that are located in Estépar. But the main topic of this image is the mass grave itself. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 16:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Because of the value. For not Spanish users: it may be interesting for you to know that the government usually is not promoting any search for killed people during the Civil War, for example, world famous poet Federico García Lorca. Lots of families keep struggling to find their relatives. So, all in all, this is quite a rare image. --Kadellar (talk) 14:08, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 17:27:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:St Diego Skyline Panorama 2013.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Diego Skyline Panorama 2013.jpg
Support It is a bit tight top and bottom, and I've indicated a dust spot and an area that looks odd (bad cloning?). Otherwise, very good. -- Colin (talk) 18:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thanks for your careful review, Colin. I've worked a bit on the sky - I guess the odd looking areas resulted from stitching - I've not done any retouching work on the image. The "dust spot" is also removed, but I think it was no dust because the camera, Olympus XZ-1, is a closed system. To the crop: I have enough space left at the bottom in my original file, but no space left at the top. Thus I decided to leave the image as it is without artificially increasing the sky vertically. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Image needs a bit of brightening - the whites right now are nowhere close to the clipping point. Otherwise excellent. --King of♥♦♣ ♠ 00:56, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 21:48:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Wroclaw - Uniwersytet Wroclawski o poranku.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wroclaw - Uniwersytet Wroclawski o poranku.jpg
Support I'd complain it was a little overprocessed, but being a long blue-hour exposure and getting so much else right more than offsets that. Daniel Case (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 06:02:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:122 mm Projectile of MRL.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:122 mm Projectile of MRL.JPG
strong Oppose Nothing special at all and poor execution, just a thing in the grass – without reading the caption I would never know what this is. --Kreuzschnabel10:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 15:20:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info The Orbital Sciences Corporation Antares rocket, with the Cygnus spacecraft onboard suffers a catastrophic anomaly moments after launch from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Pad 0A, Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2014, at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. The Cygnus spacecraft was filled with about 5,000 pounds of supplies slated for the International Space Station, including science experiments, experiment hardware, spare parts, and crew provisions. Created by NASA/Joel Kowsky - uploaded by Huntster - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support as uploader. It is such a remarkable photograph. It isn't great for the event it documents, but for the individual elements that make it up...capturing that moment of RUD at just the right settings to still see the rocket, the plume, that reddish column of exhaust that was the first indication of a problem, individual bits of debris. Mr. Kowsky is a talented photographer. — Huntster (t@c)08:33, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 13:09:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment Technically fine but I'm not sure the idea has worked. The bushes are distracting and the stop sign isn't really related to the letterboxes. Such a landscape works better with a panoramic aspect rather than 3:2. -- Colin (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The idea is simple: We drove through the desert for more than one hour and nothing was around us. Surprisingly certain traces of civilization appeared. The stop sign indicated: Stop, some people are living in this lonely area. The letterboxes are a representation for these few people who live in this unsociable area. For me this motive was very eye-catching and I really like it. BTW: I've added a landscape alternative - probably you find it more interesting. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice idea, but the composition is not the best: the letterboxes should stand against the sky, i.e. a lower point of view should be better. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Yann, and simplifying the background (e.g. by using the sky) would have helped bring out the boxes. Or cloning-out! -- Colin (talk) 13:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, thanks for your comment but the viewpoint was intentionally chosen as it is. If you take a careful look you will see that the bottom of the letterboxes exactly match with the farer edge of the road. I can see no advantage for a lower viewpoint. Cloning out the bushes is imho no good idea - especially not from a documentary perspective. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 13:47:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Porsche 911 Carrera RSR, Bj. 1974 (2011-08-13 Sp).JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porsche 911 Carrera RSR, Bj. 1974 (2011-08-13 Sp).JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 18:18:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Porto Covo Outubro 2014-3.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porto Covo Outubro 2014-3.jpg
Info With a little imagination one can see the face and ears of the water monstre threatening the poor bather. Praia Grande (Large Beach), Porto Covo, Portugal. Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:18, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2014 at 23:00:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Puente de la Margineda, Santa Coloma, Andorra, 2013-12-30, DD 08-10 HDR alt.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Puente de la Margineda, Santa Coloma, Andorra, 2013-12-30, DD 08-10 HDR alt.jpg
Support The dramatic river is really good. Question Is it a normal light traffic sign at the very right? The red cross looks somehow retouched. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is no edition apart of the HDR fusion, but I could edit it to make it "smoother". It is not a normal traffic light, but rather a sign to specify the direction of a lane that changes during the day. It could be that the cross was even blinking, I am not sure. Poco223:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I suggest to crop out the top part (top left is very blurry, and the steel pylon doesn’t add value) and a bit off the right to get rid of the traffic signage. This crop would shift the bridge over the center close to golden ratio. See image note on nomination page. --Kreuzschnabel10:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the way the eye follows the river to the bridge and the distant hills. I would be reluctant to crop out any of the sky, which adds to the overall picture. It is unfortunate that one's browser tends to start viewing a 100% picture at the top-left, where the image is most blurred, but the rest of the image is sharp. -- Colin (talk) 13:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very Nice. The long exposure displays perfectly the fluid flow around the rocks, is a great example of turbulent flow in channels formed by spaced obstacles as in industrial heat exchangers, the photo it perfect for this exemplification. Added the category fluid flows. The other cut is better but I prefer this one, I like cirrus, are beautiful. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs12:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Featured picture candidates/File:Puente de la Margineda, Santa Coloma, Andorra, 2013-12-30, DD 08-10 HDR.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Puente de la Margineda, Santa Coloma, Andorra, 2013-12-30, DD 08-10 HDR.jpg
Support Composition wise, I like this one more. While the sky was nice, it now seems to have a better focus on the main subject (the river and the valley). It is not too light, not too tight. What comes to the objectiveness, the colors look quite natural to me. The major enchancement seems to have been done for bringing back the sky (otherwise overblown) where the use of HDR is quite reasonable. To be honest, I don't see a major lack of encyclopedic value - atleast not because of that. --Ximonic (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 15:09:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:St John the Baptist Cathedral Tower, Norwich, Norfolk, UK - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:St John the Baptist Cathedral Tower, Norwich, Norfolk, UK - Diliff.jpg
Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Although regular symmetrical straight down the middle church interiors are my 'bread and butter', I thought it might be interesting to mix it up with some unusual compositions. It's a disorienting perspective at first glance, but there are some interesting details, such as the ghostly shape of 'something' in the corner of the walls above the central pillar. Diliff (talk) 15:10, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting about that "ghost" image ... I'd say it was something from the sun coming in the window, but there doesn't seem to be any pattern in the windows that could make that shadow. Daniel Case (talk) 16:35, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For me, it seems more like faded paint or chalk or something. It looks a bit like a Virgin Mary silhouette with a tilted head and flowing robes, and you can just make out the eyes, nose and mouth. Diliff (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2014 at 00:35:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Офицерски дом, Битола.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Офицерски дом, Битола.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2014 at 13:34:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose I don’t like the portrait orientation squeezing the objects into the frame – landscape would have done better, the trunk above and below the fungus is irrelevant. Besides that, for me it’s a rather average photograph of a plant, neither unusually highly detailed nor showing any interesting lighting. QI is o.k. but I don’t see in what respect it’s one of the very best on Commons. --Kreuzschnabel00:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2014 at 20:18:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Circular staircase of the Vatican Museums.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Circular staircase of the Vatican Museums.jpg
Yes, I understand why the people would be unsharp (at least the moving ones), but there are parts of the banister that are also wanting in the sharpness department.
Comment We already have two FP of the same staircase from a similar point of view: 1, 2. In this one there are too many people all over the place imo. --Kadellar (talk) 23:43, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not a question of limit of people. The idea behind FPC is just not going to the place where a recently promoted FP has been taken, then take and nominate another similar one :-) it should be somewhat different at least to success, in order to gain some variety. – In this case, I suggest to put up a D&R issue vs. the very similar File:VaticanMuseumStaircase.jpg, the technical quality of which falls below todays standards (sharpness, noise). File:Vatican Museums Spiral Staircase 2012.jpg shows a different view. --Kreuzschnabel08:06, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kreuzschnabel, I don't think that Livioandronico2013 choose to go to the Vatican museums in order to take same picture as an existing FP! Though if he had, so what. That's a hugely popular tourist destination and a popular staircase for photographs. But certainly, our FPCs should be compared against their peers at FP and other quality photos of the same subject/category. A delist isn't necessarily required, and the old photo has some merit (shot on film, different lighting/contrast, fewer people). -- Colin (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2014 at 03:21:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:17 Years of Sekar Jepun 2014-11-01 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:17 Years of Sekar Jepun 2014-11-01 01.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 15:18:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Of course it’s a nice image but I don’t see what’s it about. The walls? Not interesting enough for FP. The clock tower? Way too small. --Kreuzschnabel07:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good, rich in elements which are properly conducted during a look, the drystone walls and inversion shadow (on the plane of symmetry) of the clock tower were very good -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs13:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2014 at 08:37:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Grave of Jahangir.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grave of Jahangir.jpg
CommentSohaib Tahir, it is possible the problems Julian mentions can be fixed if reprocessed from the raw file. Do you have the raw file or was the camera set to produce JPG? Also, you should use sRGB colourspace for the web and not AdobeRGB (which is only really suitable for sending TIFFs to a print shop). -- Colin (talk) 12:32, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 14:02:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Homosexuality in Khajuraho sculpture.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Homosexuality in Khajuraho sculpture.jpg
Neutral We have only 2 FPs of this famous monument, but this composition is not good enough. The statues at the bottom are half cut. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is it really about homosexuality? The figure giving hand job to the man looks definitely female to me, despite of the beard. --Kreuzschnabel13:21, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is of a man:) In ancient Indian sculpting and especially in Khajuraho, all bearded figures represent men, and more specifically men with status, royalty etc. All figures are artistically curved, so sometimes it becomes difficult to understand which one is a man or which one is a woman. Its a well-known thing to the local people that this particular curving of two people, refer to homosexuality. Thanks. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 13:58, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2014 at 20:51:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Iberian Wolf AdF 001.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iberian Wolf AdF 001.jpg
Info Iberian Wolf in a perfect 'big bad wolf' pose - head down, eyes fixed, mouth open, forelegs stained with blood. The wolf is a perfectly wild one, but it was attracted with bait. All by me --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 20:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Español: Los faunisticos en Canidae no recomiendan usar cebos durante la época de amamantamiento o cría de los cachorros lobeznos, esto es debido a que los cebos utilizados por nosotros, los humanos no poseen la calidad de nutrientes que ellos necesitan y están disponibles naturalmente, adicionalmente la leche del lobezno podría causar modificaciones de costumbres nutricionales, por ello él debe acostumbrarse a la comida que va a consumir de adulto. Es principalmente contraindicado la utilización de señuelos durante las épocas de cortejo y apareamiento, debido a que pueden asustar e inhibir el acercamiento a la pareja, sea hembra o macho. Sin olvidar que antes de conseguir una buena foto, hay que tener paciencia y respetar el espacio de convivencia del lobo en su ambiente lobinico natural, el uso frecuente de este tipo de técnicas para forzar esta situación, por uno o varios fotografos sin relación alguna, podría ocasionar estragos conductuales en la vida del lobito --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
English: The faunistic in Canidae not recommend using baits during the time of breastfeeding or raising the cubs, this is because the bait used by us humans do not possess the quality of nutrients that they need and are available naturally, additionally milk the cub could cause changes in nutritional habits, so he should get used to the food that consume adult. It is mainly the use of decoy contraindicated during periods of courtship and mating, because they can frighten and inhibit approach to partner, whether female or male. Not to mention that before getting a good picture, you have to be patient and respect the space of coexistence of wolves in their natural environment Wolverining, frequent use of these techniques to force this situation, one or more unrelated photographs, behavior could cause havoc in the life of the litle wolf --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 19:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
Français : Le faunistique canidés recommande pas l'utilisation d'appâts pendant le temps de l'allaitement maternel ou élever les petits, cela est parce que l'appât utilisé par nous les humains ne possèdent pas la qualité des nutriments dont ils ont besoin et sont disponibles naturellement, lait en outre l'ourson pourrait causer des changements dans habitudes alimentaires, de sorte qu'il devrait obtenir utilisé pour la nourriture que consomment les adultes. Il est principalement l'utilisation de leurre contre-indiqué pendant les périodes de cour et l'accouplement, car ils peuvent effrayer et inhiber approche de partenaire, que ce soit féminin ou masculin. Sans compter que avant d'obtenir une bonne image, vous devez être patient et respecter l'espace de coexistence de loups dans leur milieu naturel Wolverining, l'utilisation fréquente de ces techniques pour forcer cette situation, une ou plusieurs photographe sans rapport, comportement pourrait causer des ravages dans la vie du petit loup --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 19:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thanks everybody for your support!! Really appreciated!! Regarding the question of Kadellar and the multi-lingual comment of Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H., please let me clarify - the "bait" was a fresh dead Roe Deer, not any kind of artificially processed food. As Pugilist mentioned, wolves are incredibly shy animals, and their senses are so amazingly sharp, that you will never be able to get close to one. I have been photographing wild wolves for many years... and I tell you, it is impossible to photograph a wild wolf in Europe at less than 400-500m distance. So what photographers do, and only from time to time, when there is a dead animal available (found dead in the bush, or killed in a road accident etc) is using the dead animal as a kind of bait. There is nothing wrong with this - it is even good for the wolves. From a code of conduct point of view, it is is always preferable to mention when a wild animal has been photographed with the help of bait. What I deeply dislike, and regard as highly unethical, is the use of LIVE bait (which, unbelievably, some people do). --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 19:28, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have not had long enough lens to photograph these animals. I used camouflage suits, manufactured by myself to photograph birds, but animals like this usually have a highly developed sense, which hinders the approach to sujeto.Yo've heard camouflage smell artificial and made shrub site . I'd love to hear your opinion. This as an alternative for photographers who do not possess long lenses. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 19:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My experience is that the eyes, ears, and noses of these animals are so unbelievably, fantastically powerful, that no camouflage will work. Let me answer more in detail in your talk page. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 19:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Truly a great accomplishment Arturo! May I propose to add the useful detail about the ethical correct baiting done in this case on the file page, as this is where all relevant details about the conditions of the shot should be placed. After 200 years of absence, the wolf is now back in Denmark, First wild one was found dead, I think, two years ago and now, there is at least one permanently "living" in Denmark - perhaps even a pack, and the DNA proof and photo evidence is right in my Viborg area, but I highly, highly doubt I will ever have the skill and patience to catch a live Danish wolf as you have here. (Poor quality photo of Danish wolf).-- Slaunger (talk) 20:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 11:41:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Mitterbach Gemeindealpe Panorama West 01.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mitterbach Gemeindealpe Panorama West 01.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 11:19:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support Good, even though the subject has gotten a little soft. It would be nice to correct the mistake of stitching of the central door right, this is very apparent, I marked other two relevant in the original nomination. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs12:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 22:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Río Moraca, norte de Podgorica, Montenegro, 2014-04-14, DD 09.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Río Moraca, norte de Podgorica, Montenegro, 2014-04-14, DD 09.JPG
Support Nice. I would remove the green pillow, the profile of aluminum, the rubber piece and black tube(marked), are not important disturbances but do not help. The four power towers on the right, should lose the contrast selectively, because they seem a reflection stripe IMO. The Alchemist-hp crop suggestion is good. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs16:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do not expect, is only a suggestion(always are suggestions) to clone, are not relevant elements (IMO). But if you prefer the realistic per Hubertl, np for my: "are not important". ; ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs21:07, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks, I am not sure, though about it. I can easily get rid of that but if posible I'd avoid this kind of editing. Maybe we hear more opinions. Poco221:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think the weather was not in your favor, the brightness is not the best causing opaque colors. Additionaly bushes hide part of the river bed would have been more interesting a view from a higher place. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I can say that I enjoy very much this kind of weather for this kind of photography, and there was no physical way to take the picture from a higher POV Poco213:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wilfredo, do you really suggest that in my photographic tours I take a truck with an elevator instead of a normal rental car? :S Poco211:32, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2014 at 11:19:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Murviel-lès-Béziers from North.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Murviel-lès-Béziers from North.jpg
Support. Very good composition and lighting. -- 91.35.133.73 11:38, 2 November 2014 (UTC) Sorry, but only registered users are allowed to vote... Did you forget to log in ? Gzzz (talk) 12:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Horizon in the middle is not, in general, a good idea for a "very good composition", IMO. But this is only a comment, not a decline vote.--Jebulon (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delist I am no fan of delist nominations, but independently of the resolution this one does imho not deserve the FP seal. The iron background from the cage is very bad, also the dark shadow parts. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an image was in the past featured! not today!!! This is and was for ever in the past, we can not "turm back time". All our FP have a time stap: featured at time XYZ ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:11, 26 October 2014 (UTC) ok the will of the author: Delist --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please look up our guidelines on delisting images: Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. Thus, delisting FPs which no longer meet the latest requirements should be a quite normal procedure – as a matter of fact, this is the only delisting reason given in the guidelines! Your point is entirely irrelevant, sorry. --Kreuzschnabel11:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Kreuzschnabel: It's high time to correct our rules/guidlines. I think this is a stupid rule for old images, because we have our time-stamp! I shall take the liberty to ignore "stupid" rules! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I personally don’t consider this rule stupid because FP is a collection of the best images Commons has to offer, in present tense. The idea behind FP is not so much granting a never-revokable "well done" for the photographer but building up a selection of the very best media present. It’s quite natural that old media has to leave while new and better images get in. Of course the rules may be changed but not because they’re stupid in your eyes but as a result of a discussion considering all aspects. Until then, you ought to stick to them when voting here. Your suggestion adds up to discard delisting entirely. --Kreuzschnabel12:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have my opinion, I have my opinion, I have my opinion! And at first most important step: please show me a better similar image on our commons libary. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good to read you’ve got your opinion, but I already was quite aware of that. But sorry once more – why would we need a better similar one? If we would, any ugly lo-res webcam photo would be featurable if there wasn’t a better similar one. You see this point is ridiculous. This is not VIC, we don’t look for one pic per subject. If there is just one image of a certain subject on Commons, we don’t have to feature it just because there’s no better one! It’s a very simple matter: This very image here is below today’s FP level and therefore it should today be delisted, even if it did reach FP level when it was featured. That’s all. EOD for me, let’s go on with the voting. --Kreuzschnabel16:37, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
An image with a very low quality, artificially "high" resolution, very noisy, BW, exorbitant unsharp, but our rules says: eligible for a delist process :-)
Keep per above, while we can use "wow" and "not wow", "in my taste" and refuse (close the eyes) a obvious technical flaws (I also do this, and it is my shame too) I have to agree with Alchemist. This is not a criticism! Is a weight into the balance, if we exercise rigor that is always (IMHO) ; ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs11:22, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delist The image size is too small and the editing too obvious. I agree it is no longer FP standard. Thanks for the mail Alchemist :) (I'd protest about the "Closed eyes isssue" - its a picture of an expression. You know it - it's the "Streetch! Grooaan, Maaan the world is great today puurrrr" it is impossible to do with open eyes :P ) Anyway it's nice to know what happens with my FP pics - it looks stupid i brag about them on my userpage when they are delisted ;D Oh and just for the record it is probably time to delist the others too. They were taken with the same camera and therefore quite likely has the same size issues:
Barn swallow, (Hirundo rustica).
Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus).
Handmade soap
Mandrill (Mandrillus sphinx)
Oak (Quercus robur) forest
Egeskov castle, Denmark
Running scandinavian brown bear (Ursus arctos arctos)
I would be grateful if someone would see to it they get delisted too and that i get removed from the featured photographers list since i with this definitely am no longer entitled to be there. I barely know how to edit stuff in here any longer. Good luck in the future Wikimedia Commons. Yay for our cool project evolving. --Malene Thyssen (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You see me a bit bewildered now. Seven years ago there was no bitterness and personal offence (or did I mistake the previous paragraph?) in delisting an FP. If this was a verdict on your photographic skills altogether, I would have to disappear from Commons much earlier :-) --Kreuzschnabel20:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wut? noo no bitterness here! I was here since some time 2002 and it's been so wonderful seeing Wikipedia and Commons grow over the years. The fact my featured pictures are being delisted only shows that we are getting better and better content. I don't contribute much these days - to the point i nearly forgot how to edit anything in here. But it is good to see there are still people with passion carrying on the torch :) --Malene Thyssen (talk) 17:48, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 16:46:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info It was indeed the zig-zagging walls inspiring me to press the button here. Later I realized the barns are lining up too – that’s when I decided to put it up on FPC. I do agree the choice of aperture is not the best but I had to act quickly due to the light rapidly changing. --Kreuzschnabel06:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The scenery is great, the technical quality (DOF) just acceptable. Exposure time of 1/750 sec. with f/2.8 for a 25mm lens is for sure not the best choice. --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:42, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 23:41:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kiikla mõisa tuuleveski.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kiikla mõisa tuuleveski.jpg
Oppose A QI, nothing more. The foreground is unattractive. The resolution not particularly high yet not particularly sharp. -- Colin (talk) 19:49, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 20:02:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Rainbow Horseshoe Falls.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rainbow Horseshoe Falls.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 21:50:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment Colours of organs are to be as they are. I want them to be cold, metallic and constrasting with warmth of this wooden church. This is not unnatural colour. --Jar.ciurus (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For sure you are amazing photographer and you take really great photos, but those from Peace Church in Świdnica... well I don't like it. IMO colours are oversaturated and too bright.--Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree that the colours are reasonably accurate too. When the light is cold outside and warm inside, it is impossible to get both looking neutral (without selectively desaturating them, that is). They will always be blueish and yellowish. But I do think the overall tonality looks... strange. It looks a bit cartoonish, but that could be simply because the interior itself is. It almost looks like a film set to me, a replica of a real church interior! Diliff (talk) 11:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You can believe or not - this church looks like building from fantasy world. When i entered the church I thought only "wow!". It is very colorful and beautiful in real. If you haven't visited this building yet - do it as immediately as it's possible! I can sent to someone some example RAW files of this session - you'll see that this church looks simiraly as yo see at this picture. But generally - I don't care if this photo will be "featured picture" or not. This is just my vision of this beautiful church and I tried to record this interior as natural as I can. --Jar.ciurus (talk) 21:09, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
byłem w tym kościele i, niestety albo stety, kolorystyka i światła są jednak nie tak piękne, nasycone i silne jak na tym zdjęciu. Tutaj wygląda po prostu sztucznie. Zdjęcie jest piękne, ale nienaturalne, i tyle --Pudelek (talk) 10:33, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2014 at 16:57:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support This is a window in a facade of stucco inside of the "Cuarto Dorado", one of the part of the Nasrid Palaces inside of the Alhambra of Granada, Andalusia, Spain. It is very beautiful by itself, and could be featurable (IMO) without further explanations. But what is fascinating here (to me) is the repetition (by many ways, in many forms, see annotations) of the motto of the Arab Nasrid dynasty, which ruled over the muslim kingdom of Granada from 1238 until his fall, the very end of the "Reconquista", January 2, 1492. This motto, Wa lā gāliba illā-llāh (ولا غالب إلا الله), means "Nobody is victorious, but God". These sculptures and walls are dated from the 13th-century C.E. (therefore not perfectly straight everywhere...), and are classified as "Kufic florid calligraphy works". Please see here (in french), for other elements and links about "Al-Andalus". Thanks for interest.-- Jebulon (talk) 16:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 10:43:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose QI and useful image. Image lacks something - people small and looking away. The viewpoint is documentary but not involving. -- Colin (talk) 19:56, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2014 at 06:40:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kevin Pietersen 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kevin Pietersen 2014.jpg
Oppose I like(d) watching KP, but imo this image is not a favorable one. For me, a sportsman should rather be pictured in his proper clothes (and even better, batting) and perhaps not with that kind of look on his face. Furthermore the quality is not very good. --DXR (talk) 07:34, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 12:46:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Naturaleza Xerófila de la Isla de Margarita.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Naturaleza Xerófila de la Isla de Margarita.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2014 at 10:27:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Tirana - Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Telecommunications.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tirana - Ministry of Public Works, Transportation and Telecommunications.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 11:28:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:서봉총 금관 금제드리개.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:서봉총 금관 금제드리개.jpg
Hi, I cannot perform crop with my PC, so I tried CropTool on mobile and it was awful. (After the crop, file became 980 kb!) I will perform crop on the PC in one or two days. —revimsg14:13, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2014 at 16:17:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Catedral de Sé.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Catedral de Sé.jpg
Info The São Paulo See Metropolitan Cathedral — "See" and "cathedra" mean "seat" and therefore the ecclesiastical authority of a bishop or archbishop (in Portuguese: Catedral Metropolitana, or Catedral da Sé de São Paulo) is the cathedral of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of São Paulo, Brazil. As of 2013 the Metropolitan Archbishop of the archdiocese was Cardinal Odilo Pedro Scherer. Its construction, in Neo-Gothic style, began in 1913 and ended four decades later. It was ready for its dedication on the 400th anniversary of the foundation of the then humble villa of São Paulo by Chief or Cacique Tibiriçá and the Jesuit priests Manuel da Nóbrega and José de Anchieta. Despite having a Renaissance-styled dome, the São Paulo Metropolitan Cathedral is considered by some to be the 4th largest neo-gothic cathedral in the world. Created and uploaded by The Photographer - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 15:03:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Arundel Cathedral Sanctuary, West Sussex, UK - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Arundel Cathedral Sanctuary, West Sussex, UK - Diliff.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2014 at 15:05:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Centaurea jacea 01.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Centaurea jacea 01.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2014 at 16:54:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Ljungris October 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ljungris October 2014.jpg
Info Reindeer calf marking enclosures at Ljungris, Berg Municipality, Jämtland County. Ljungris is owned by the Sámi (Handöldalens sameby) and used for calf marking in the summer. In the background mount Helags and Sylan, the highest mountains south of Artic circle in Sweden. Panorama from 5 images, no downsampling. Created, uploaded and nominated by-- Arild Vågen (talk) 16:54, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alvesgaspar, to "correct" the house you have to rotate the image 3 degrees (please try on your computer) and the rest of the image will become extremely tilted. As I said, I have checked all the pictures I have of the house and all images I used for the panorama. And the house's walls are not straight. This is alpine environment with strong winds and it's simple fence and a simple built old storage shed.--ArildV (talk) 18:23, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 12:34:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Oppose Just one of many well-done but insufficiently wowing photos of autumn color we get from the upper temperate Northern Hemisphere at this time of year. Sorry. Daniel Case (talk) 19:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Dear Kreuzschnabel , I have never said that the image is the most cool of the world , I said "I like it",i Like the composition. It looks like a hug between two trees.If you don't think you can Oppose as your right, but I don't see why this whole story. --LivioAndronicotalk10:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You’re right, I apologize for putting it this way. I am just a bit afraid that this forum of picking the very best images on Commons might go down to a „nice picture“ voting, collecting "Like"s as if we were on Facebook. Just "liking" an image is IMHO not enough for an FP support, I expect an FPC to be outstanding in some way, be it composition, lighting, impressiveness or technical execution. I didn’t get you’re supporting this one for composition (and yes, it is nice). --Kreuzschnabel19:57, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
strong Oppose Poor JPEG quality (artifacts in twigs against sky), unfortunate light (a lot of leaves look blurry and/or overexposed), nothing special in composition – did you really mean to nominate this one? --Kreuzschnabel09:01, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question What should the last part mean? If lots of other people including yourself nominate low-wow images for FP (I *very* rarely see real wow on FPC these days), so why shouldn't I be free to do the same? Some animals = more equal than others? --A.Savin20:16, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree that real wow is rarely seen here, but do I take it right from your answer that you deliberately nominated a lo-wow pic just to lower the level even more? This is becoming a sharade. Sorry for my ugly nominations, it won’t happen again in the near future, I’m out of this. Have fun together. --Kreuzschnabel23:50, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It will be better (much more WOW :)) if you crop all the grass at bottom IMO, I'm even sure. I agree that there is some sharpening artefacts around line foliage/sky, also the light is harsh. Thus I will stay neutral even with a crop. The subject and this kind of composition can be good IMO and can work for me. -- Christian FerrerTalk / Im. / Fav.20:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 14:03:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Buda de Avukana - 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Buda de Avukana - 01.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2014 at 12:05:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Chrysaora fuscescens Ripley's Aquarium of Canada 3.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chrysaora fuscescens Ripley's Aquarium of Canada 3.JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2014 at 17:45:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Religión en Isla Margarita, Valle del Espíritu Santo.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Religión en Isla Margarita, Valle del Espíritu Santo.jpg
Neutral A very special mood, no doubt, nice image. I’m just wondering if it’s special enough for me to compensate for its small size of just 2.6 megapixels. Pity the face is so unsharp, would prefer to see it sharp instead of the fingers. --Kreuzschnabel21:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe this section should raise the requirements, please feel free to propose it in the discussion page. Additionally, I will not bother if you give me one d810 (I'm kidding) --The Photographer (talk) 21:41, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do not want to discuss the guidelines. But an image barely above our 2 mpix minimum has to be very special to get my support. This very picture, though not showing the best technical quality (noise, sharpness), conveys a very special mood and is unique in this way, that’s why I am still considering which side to lean to. Would be helpful if you'd try not to sound offended. --Kreuzschnabel06:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do not feel offended, I like the negative comments, especially when they help me become a better photographer, however, there are realities that can not change, for example, things that depend on the ability of the camera. I notice several of yours comments regarding the size of my nominations , that's the reason I think it is important that you propose a change requirements that are currently in 2mpx. It's always good to note not only the problem but a solution, I hope you can raise any alternative technique to improve the size. I sounded rude, that was not my intention, I appreciate your comments. --The Photographer (talk) 08:27, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Kreuzschnabel that the resolution guideline is a (fairly) hard lower limit but each image must be judged for itself. Low resolution/sharpness and other technical weaknesses are balanced against artistic merits and each reviewer comes to their own conclusion. I prefer if reviewers have freedom to take resolution into account when judging, rather than for us to ignore resolution if >2mp. -- Colin (talk) 08:52, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WeakSupport Nicely lit and well framed. There's a triangle between the eye-lines of the figurine, the man and his hand placing the candle, which is excellent. The casual clothes of the man weakens the mood a little, though. However, I can't ignore the issues Kreuzschnabel notes. I suspect you had to crop heavily to achieve the framing presented here. I tried to search for similar images online, thinking this would be a popular subject and easily reproduced. But am disappointed with what I found. So on balance I think the excellent image wins (just) over the low resolution. (BTW, I don't think the image title is useful/helpful, and the page needs proper categories for the actual subject of the photograph -- currently it would be like me taking a photograph of my minister and calling it "Religion in Hertfordshire"). -- Colin (talk) 08:52, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WeakSupport It's the mood and composition which makes this image shine and I don't feel the need to zoom in, so I'm OK with the size. It's a bit noisy, but since it's no color noise that doesn't really bother me in this case. I agree with Colin about usefulness, though: At the very least I would expect a note on where it was taken. --El Grafo (talk) 10:05, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mile, where are these 40Mpx cameras? Perhaps there are one or two people on Commons with a medium format camera. Averages are utterly meaningless -- one might as well say the average pixel colour at FP is green so why is this so yellow. One simply can't compare multi-megapixel stitched panoramas of buildings with a candle-lit portrait. I love fantasticly high resolution images as much as the next person here (and have uploaded some > 200MP) but they are a completely different kind of photography to this. There is far, far more to photography and art than MP or sharpness -- but gear-obsessed camera forums might give another impression. Many people here have cameras at 12 or 14 MP and it only takes a 50% crop to drop down to the size presented here. If I'm right that this has been cropped rather than downsized, then yes The Photographer could have zoomed more and composed the scene better in-camera. I don't disagree with your oppose for the low resolution offered here, but please your argument is not valid or fair. -- Colin (talk) 09:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think its time to raise 2Mpx limit, which was set long ago. Nothing personal, nor spceial, simply all went up, resolutions, screens, you can get now screenshot of 4K as photo suitable for FP "Photo" nominee. --Mile (talk) 10:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
CommentMile I agree this is a fact, but we must consider that this is a global work(IMO) and we take into account that not everyone has access to cutting-edge equipment (here an equipment cost in real prices for a employed person are 4-6 times in other parts of the world!).We want only photographers who have advantages in cost and equipment acquisition will post photos here on Commons? Evaluate you how many publishers turn their photos into "featured" and distribute it geographically, both the source of editor and a location of the pictures ... it's impressive. Isn't a critical and there are other factors to consider but I think a bit of insight does not hurt. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs13:04, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do think an oppose over size is reasonable decision here, just that Petar's arguments about 40MP cameras isn't quite reality. FYI, The Photographer's 12MP camera produces a 3MP image if cropped 50%. Someone with a 24MP camera gets 6MP after a 50% crop and someone with a 36MP D800 gets 9MP. There's a big cropping advantage to having the latest and most expensive kit. I do think that the days where we accept a < 5MP architecture or studio portrait at FP are probably numbered, if not already past. 5MP prints in high quality to A4. The very latest 5K displays are 14MP, but are a few years from being common. On en:wp FP, the limit is 1500px on the shortest side, which corresponds to about 3.4MP for a 3:2 image. I'd like to retain the option to accept low MP if the image has other compensating qualities, but wouldn't mind increasing the general threshold a bit, or having a higher threshold for some kinds of image. -- Colin (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I like your equilibrium of argument Colin. About the above, on the other hand the quality of optical resolution of the sensors are inversely proportional to it, so this linearity is not correct(if I understand correctly, teach me if I'm wrong). For the same sharpness and an acceptable noise (especially in dark areas) in economic sensors (or entrance) the cut should be much higher for an acceptable result (not counting the lens set). But it is right to opposition vote. I am not opposed to the vote, just throw another viewpoint on the matter, I also like to have all the perfect images at high resolutions, but I try to have an overview of all aspects, vote and share my opinion. ; ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs17:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment D300 is a bit older but still very good camera, has 12 MPx. Not cheap, and still good priced as used. Looking just at photo, agree no need for bigger, no more aditional data to get from such. No need. If would be croped, no problem, it happens. But if downsizing becomes habbit for avoiding this and that, then it is not so good anymore. I am wondering, how would voting go if photo would be fullsized. Would it make difference ? On the other hand. Cropping by 50% still makes bigger than this size, and yet question, did you take good composition, did you know what to shot at ? Could be photo feautered if not knowing what would be on ? Question to Wilfredo, is it croped or downsized ? --Mile (talk) 18:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a downsize, but I have no certainty of it that way, I've been looking for the raw file to upload to commonsarchive, however, I have the suspicion that I deleted it. I will try search this weekend again. We need a better RAW repository --The Photographer (talk) 12:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Getting slightly off-topic, but mobile and pad web browsing now exceeds desktop usage, and w3schools is most likely to be browsed on a PC at college or work, which tend to be low-cost displays. I'd say around Full-HD 1920x1080 is probably the most common display size purchased right now on any desktop and quality mobile devices, and 2048 x 1536 on current tablets. Which puts this image on the threshold of filling an Apple/Google tablet display. A Diliff multi megapixel cathedral, or Google Art painting is amazing because it can be explored, not just for what size it could conceivably be printed or displayed at -- which doesn't really apply to this image. I think the 1500px on the shortest side rule is a reasonable one for today for some kinds of image, but for other kinds it can encourage downsize-for-the-web. -- Colin (talk) 20:45, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 07:47:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:17 Years of Sekar Jepun 2014-11-01 72.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:17 Years of Sekar Jepun 2014-11-01 72.jpg
Comment Bitte demnächst nur armamputierte Paralympics-Teilnehmerinnen fotografieren, überflüssige Gliedmaßen stören den Bildaufbau, auch wenn das Teil der Choreografie war.--Hubertl (talk) 14:39, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ein guter Photograph drück nur dann auf den Auslöser, wenn das Gesicht gerade mal nicht verdeckt ist. Auch so eine Szene ist nämlich Teil einer Choreografie. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 22:55:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Park w Kłodzku.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Park w Kłodzku.jpg
This is not a CA, only the strong sunlight shining towards the lens. CA is colorful, and the phenomenon in the upper right corner is without color.--Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:44, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a CA, only the strong sunlight shining towards the lens. CA is colorful, and the phenomenon in the upper right corner is without color.--Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:44, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great mood and composition. The "CA" looks like "blooming" to me, which is a CCD phenomenon though while the D7100 has a CMOS sensor. I tend to blame the lens for coma, a 18–200 mm superzoom would naturally not serve as a master in sharpness and contrast control like a 50 mm prime would have done here (see lenstip.com, worst coma just at 50 mm focal length!). – What’s worse, the image is overexposed IMHO, the automatic metering did not guess quite correctly, thus Oppose. Is the RAW still available? If so, I suggest to re-develop with −⅔ or even −1 EV exposure correction. --Kreuzschnabel19:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
CommentI am not able to open the original file after downloading. I tried it several times. Wheater with LR, PS or Irfan view, it won´t work! Any other pictures do! It works now after three times.. :-( --Hubertl (talk) 09:47, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
HalfOppose Has anyone looked at previous featured pictures of this theme? It seems like this one is nice, but not exceptional given the content (similar to how I'd evaluated a sunset). -- Ram-Man02:38, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 18:29:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Berliner Platz Mülheim 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Berliner Platz Mülheim 2014.jpg
Support Thanks a lot, Tomer T for the nomination. This photo was one of my first more serious attempts of using a nodal point adapter for documenting public squares. In de-wp some users dislike such shots due to the extreme angle of view (nearly 360° in the case here). In think such shots are quite valuable from an encyclopedic view and look pleasing at the same time due to the high level of detail. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:54, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This kind of panoramic views doesn't work without panoramic viewing software. Maybe there will be someday an open source 3D viewer in the Wikipedia, enough money is imho available for such a development... -- Smial (talk) 13:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm forced to agree with the opposers, but wow, the sharpness on this is incredible. I wish all FP and QI had this level of technical quality. -- Ram-Man02:24, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2014 at 08:26:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Hills and vineyards, Roquebrun.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hills and vineyards, Roquebrun.jpg
Support Many things to see here, very good technical achievement, and simply lovely, especially the light. Happy to support this one.--Jebulon (talk) 16:12, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would have waited for the sun going even further down and the house should have been and a "rule of third" point, but very nice otherwise - Benh (talk) 12:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 19:51:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Intern of church of St. Louis of France.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Intern of church of St. Louis of France.JPG
Support Taking into account the fact that you do not have the best photographic equipment, I am postively impressed how the image- and also the motive quality (your biggest deficiency, I presume, same with me!) for the last two months improved. -- Hubertl 20:20, 3 November 2014
Support - I'd have probably focused on something a little closer than the painting (allowing greater DOF) but this is already very impressive. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Things I don't like: Shallow DoF (f/4.5?), people in the photo, and I wish the picture were taken on an elevated tripod to cut out the pews in the foreground. These add up to a good, but less than FP picture. -- Ram-Man02:30, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2014 at 10:49:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Anémone Japon&fruits 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Anémone Japon&fruits 2014.jpg
Oppose Good quality and light, and interesting and refreshing compsition. Unfortunately, the composition does not work quite for me though. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:48, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2014 at 09:03:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Camels in Jordan valley (4568207363).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Camels in Jordan valley (4568207363).jpg
Comment The composition is not so good IMO. I propose another crop (see annotation). In addition, I do not like the light, but I also realise it is hard to get better light in this environment. --Slaunger (talk) 21:53, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 14:15:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Catedral de Salisbury, Salisbury, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 35-37 HDR.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Catedral de Salisbury, Salisbury, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 35-37 HDR.JPG
Info North transept (with the north wall in the middle) of the Salisbury Cathedral, located in the city of Salisbury, Wiltshire, England, is the largest in Britain. The temple, an Anglican cathedral, is one of the leading examples of Early English architecture. The canopy on the left is dedicated to John Michael Peniston (Salisbury architect), in the tomb in the middle lies Bishop John Blyth (Bishop of Salisbury between 1493-1499) and the statue on the right honours the historian Richard Colt Hoare. The cathedral was consecrated in 1258 and its spire is the tallest in the United Kingdom. All by me, Poco214:15, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Don't agree this is how tone mapping should be used. It looks a tad overdone to me, and unfortunately, Diliff provides us with a ton of better executed pictures of similar subjects. It's still a striking place and picture with a delicate lighting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benh (talk • contribs) Poco219:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The conditions, with bright sunlight, are difficult and the stained glass is not blown. However, the direct sunlight on the stone is completely blown (it may have been pulled back to an off white, but there's no detail). But those areas are small overall and the important aspects are exposed fine. Btw, in my discussion with Poco_a_poco he said he used enfuse for HDR. This is an exposure fusion technique that does not generate a high-dynamic-range intermediate stage, nor does it apply any tone mapping. The effect can be more natural than that produced by crude tonemapping software like Photomatix, but several of my textbooks regard Lightroom's tonemapping as the current state-of-the-art when fed a 32-bit floating-point HDR tiff. One still needs another tool to produce such an HDR tiff (e.g. Photomatix), however. That's the technique I believe Diliff uses with success, though the intermediate files are huge. My guess is that 3 exposures were insufficient to capture the full dynamic range in this scene. -- Colin (talk) 21:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed I use the enfuse tooling for my (pseudo-)HDRs. I've been using it for over one year and I am pretty convinced about the results, so I'll keep doing it, but of course a matter of taste. Poco221:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2014 at 22:18:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Cole Thomas The Oxbow (The Connecticut River near Northampton 1836).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cole Thomas The Oxbow (The Connecticut River near Northampton 1836).jpg
Comment I always have problems judging digital reproductions of paintings entered at FPC, because I'm missing criteria for what makes such a reproduction featurable. Is it enough to have an awesome painting or or should the focus lie on the quality of the reproduction? For instance, while this certainly is an outstanding painting, I fail to see what makes this particular reproduction of it stand out against alternative versions such as this one. Sure, it has a higher resolution, but that alone doesn't make me go "Wow!". If I was able to discern individual brush strokes or the structure of the canvas, that would be a different story. This version, though smaller in size, seems to contain much more fine detail. That's likely due to downscaling or sharpening in post-processing, but if viewed at screen size it looks much sharper. As someone who hasn't seen the original, it's impossible for me to judge which one does represent the original better. In this special case, it's also bugging me quite a bit that the immediate source for the reproduction is simply stated as "unknown" though the image has been uploaded by a bot. All in all I tend to Oppose this one. --El Grafo (talk) 16:56, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
El Grafo The image was painted by a notable painter during a notable time in American art history. While I will not dispute your views, I want to let you know that the scene looks nothing like that right now (an interstate, railroad, and a federal highway all cross the oxbow) and there is a lot of development in the area. It looks far from pastoral now, so that kind of makes the painting a bit nicer looking. Regardless, I just wanted to comment here and completely respect your rationale. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:39, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for understanding, Kevin Rutherford. I have no doubt that this is a very valuable painting for multiple reasons. Might be worth a try to nominate it for FP at Wikipedia, where they seem to rate educational value much higher. Cheers, --El Grafo (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2014 at 15:16:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Comet 67P on 19 September 2014 NavCam.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Comet 67P on 19 September 2014 NavCam.jpg
Support Better appearance, despite the noise included is not consistent at full resolution, other aspects are secondary for this assembly considering the motif. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs23:58, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2014 at 22:45:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia San Juan Kaneo, Ohrid, Macedonia, 2014-04-17, DD 19.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia San Juan Kaneo, Ohrid, Macedonia, 2014-04-17, DD 19.JPG
Martin Falbisoner: I agree with you, the view of the church from this angle is really nice and actually my favourite out of the 50 pictures I took, but under "better" weather conditions and due to its location you'll have strong shadows cast in one site or the other, as you can see in previous FPCs [2][3]. So, actually, I believe that I was pretty lucky in this case. Poco216:53, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out. Now I agree with you and change my vote to weak Support.
Comment Very nice. However the church and the buildings on the other side of the lake are leaning. Can you try to correct this? --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Uoaei1: The correction is no big deal but I am right now in the middle of my next photographic tour and unfortunately have no access to the RAW file (I could theoretically manipulate the JPG and create a new one but I prefer working on the source). I will apply the correction in 2 weeks, promised! :) Poco221:24, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2014 at 20:59:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Jack Johnson 2014.jpg/2Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jack Johnson 2014.jpg/2
Thanks, I did´nt even know, that a glass like this even exists! Want have! Seems even better than my 100mm f/2.8, especially for this occasions! --Hubertl (talk) 10:46, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Love it! Is it worth reducing the noise a bit, though? I tried running this through Noise Ninja at an NR of 8, and the results were quite nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't think that's too noisy at all. It's a concert photo, our brains are better at noise reduction than algorithms. At non-100%, the noise really isn't strong. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files)09:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
^this! Concert Photography is a fickle thing. One shoots at higher ISO of which the consequence is digital noise. Finding the right balance between ISO, shutter speed, and aperture while the lights are constantly changing takes a ton of experience and a little noise is okay and one shouldn't be afraid to see it in a picture like this. On top of this, you have to wait for the subject to peel his/her face away from the mic, all in the first three songs. Thank you for all the compliments guys! Peter Chiapperino (talk) 02:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hi guys I went ahead and made the edits you suggested, (slight crop and removed chins spot), unfortunately its not letting me upload a new version of the file. What do I do?
Comment@Peterchiapperino: Your problem might be that UploadWizard currently does not support uploading new versions of existing files. Try this: Go to File:Jack Johnson 2014.jpg, scroll down to the File history and click on Upload a new version of this file. If that doesn't work, I don't know what's wrong. --El Grafo (talk) 11:14, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Peterchiapperino, could you be a bit more precise. Is the link El Grafo mentions there? Does it go here?. You need to click on Browse button and select the new file. Fill in the "file changes". And press Upload file. At which point does it "not let you" and how does it not let you? -- 19:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2014 at 03:09:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Painted Hall dome interior.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Painted Hall dome interior.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2014 at 21:08:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Rückzug aus dem Danewerk 5-6. Februar 1864.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rückzug aus dem Danewerk 5-6. Februar 1864.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2014 at 16:53:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Seven Sisters Panorama, East Sussex, England - May 2009.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Seven Sisters Panorama, East Sussex, England - May 2009.jpg
Oppose Alternating unsharp and sharp zones are irritating (I added an annotation about an unsharp one – the parts right of it are definitely much sharper). Maybe fixable by re-stitching after masking the unsharp areas (provided that the source images overlap wide enough). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kreuzschnabel (talk • contribs) 00:35, 6 November 2014 UTC (UTC)
To be honest, I don't even see it. Maybe it's there, but it must be very subtle. Given the overall sharpness (even the least sharp areas are probably sharper than most images nominated here) and high resolution, I don't think it's really cause for opposition. Diliff (talk) 06:35, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I see it now, but I still think it's quite insignificant. I guess it was maybe because I had not locked the focus and each frame had a slightly different focus distance. Diliff (talk) 06:37, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The unsharp bit is no less sharp than many FPs. Consider that to see the unsharpness at 100% on a typical desktop monitor, you are looking at a poster 2.2m wide from 30cm away (that's 7.4 feet wide from 1 foot). -- Colin (talk) 15:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 21:30:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Sitting ducks.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sitting ducks.jpg
Oppose This is merely a snapshot. I don't like the colors, the color balance, the contrast, the noise, and I don't find the scene funny. -- Ram-Man21:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Low quality, low meaning. Neither a photo of a species nor a place. Abrimaal (talk) 2014-11-12 01:07 (UTC)
Oppose Funny image indeed but unfortunate background, and the ducks are too small for me. Maybe this couldn’t have been taken better but bad luck, sometimes it’s impossible to take an FP of something. --Kreuzschnabel09:16, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 20:47:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:St. Nikolaus in Mittelberg und Schlern.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:St. Nikolaus in Mittelberg und Schlern.jpg
Support I would like to be able to complain that it's a little oversharpened in some areas and distorted at the lower right. I would like to, but the picture is too beautiful otherwise to let me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
still Neutral – Nice image! Pity it looks slightly oversharpened but worst part of that is the bright halo around the left edge of the tower top, keeping me from supporting. Should be fixable by cloning. --Kreuzschnabel19:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I will support once the white halo in the sky around the tower and also the mountains will have been removed (clone stamp, c. 2 px). --Cayambe (talk) 16:58, 7 November 2014 (UTC)~[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2014 at 15:25:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Uffizi Gallery - Daughter of Niobe bent by terror.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Uffizi Gallery - Daughter of Niobe bent by terror.jpg
Support Very nice composition and lighting. Bokeh not as smooth as I’d like to see though. Which lens did you use? I can’t make anything of the EXIF data. --Kreuzschnabel10:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
InfoKreuz Its handheld, tripod couldn't use in museum. Lens is Panasonic Lumix 20 mm f/1.7. Gaving smaller aperture for bokeh would risk sharpness due to longer time. So this is avarage best. --Mile (talk) 17:20, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2014 at 12:44:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Wollaita Girl, Ethiopia.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wollaita Girl, Ethiopia.jpg
Comment An interesting portrait, I need to think/compare a bit more to make my decision. I'm a bit uncomfortable with the image title -- seems a little 19th-century-ethinic-classification to me. Assuming Wollaita is the town/village, then even "Girl, Wollaita, Ethiopia" would be better imo. I looked at Rod's photostream and albums (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rod_waddington/sets/) and see there's a huge amount of high quality photography from round the world, all with a free licence. Since Rod is clearly happy to give away his images, I wonder if it would be a good idea to invite him to join Commons. He'd be able to help better classify and annotate his images, use them in WP articles and also interact with us at Featured Pictures. One difficulty that can occur at FP with external images is that any problems with the image or description/location/classification become difficult to resolve -- something that doesn't occur if we can talk directly. It would also enable Rod to nominate his own best images from his collection. I could send him a Flick message, but perhaps you want to invite him here since it's your nomination. -- Colin (talk) 13:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Rod relicenced his photos after my request, and have invited him to Commons on a few occasions. As to the non-issues you raise, Rod always adequately names his photos, so it is very easy to categorise, etc. The en:Wolayta people are an ethnic group in Ethiopia. russavia (talk) 02:50, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Wollaita Girl, Ethiopia.jpg" could be acceptable maybe, but the opened file is named "Girl of the Welayta ethnic group.jpg", it is as unacceptable as, for instance, "Boy of the Jewish ethnic group.jpg".--Jebulon (talk) 23:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Rod's comments on Flickr shows that you are wrong. ;o) And you can't judge if it is tilt or not in such a picture. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:48, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice picture. Off topic: Would it be considered racist if we had a picture with a title "Dutch girl, The Netherlands" ? It is not embarrasing to be Dutch, so why do all the white guys here consider it degrading to be Wollaita ? I assume most Wollaita people are quite proud to be Wollaita. I would consider it more racist denying non-caucasians the right to be identified with an ethnic group. Anyone consider this picture racist ? -- Pugilist (talk) 14:59, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Dutch" is not an ethnic category, but a national one. The girl here is Ethiopian. I would like to see this girl in her cultural environment, doing something, not just portrayed as an ethnic specimen (read Colin below), sorry. Remember this, from a book named "Natural History of mammals"--Jebulon (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Where are these "white guys" considering it "degrading to be Wollaita"? Pugilist, The Photographer. Let's not be careless with the "racist" word. Classification of people primarily by their race or ethnic group has a troubled history (slavery, eugenics and genocide have their roots in the consideration that someone is not "a fellow human being" but one of "them"). While the study of ethnic groups is a valid science, tourists photographing indigenous people is increasingly seen as exploitative. I have no idea of the circumstances surrounding the taking of this photograph (and others in the Flickr group) so I trust it was respectfully and considerately done. Several hundred years of European oppression of other people groups makes me uncomfortable with such labelling. This lady is a person with a name, a family, an occupation; she is not a butterfly specimen. -- Colin (talk) 20:57, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Colin: It is off topic and we could probably have a long discussion about this. I guess nobody disagree that slavery etc. was and is horrible and nobody disagree that the person on the photograph is a person with a name. My point was a little different. Pugilist (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to know what your point was, because all I see is an attempt to paint "the white guys here" as racist (i.e. thinking it is degrading to be Wollaita)", which is unacceptable and should be retracted. You've made a lot of assumptions, including that "most Wollaita people are quite proud to be Wollaita" rather than "completely reject ethnic grouping as a means by which to consider oneself better than another". You should note my point is whether ethnic/racial group is desirable primary classification (ie. filename) not whether it is a reasonable secondary classification (category), which it is (if done correctly). But we lack any other information about this person, so what can we do.. -- Colin (talk) 22:26, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see you missed the point. I understand your point but as you mention there is not much information from the flickr source. A discussion of an eventual new file name should be made another place. Pugilist (talk) 23:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that Pugilist's point is that white, male, rich and privileged people will never understand how it is to be black, woman, poor or any other minority. Their intentions normally are good but they see the world though different eyes. The Photographer (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done Russavia, Julian maybe, I think a straightened face highlights more the character of his gaze. This is just MHO, each observer will have his own reality.--The Photographer (talk) 11:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]Portrait of a Wollaita girl in Ethiopia, tilt correction
Comment Guys/gals, can we please have just a little bit of decorum here. I'm not a FP regular, but if the above is indicative of what goes on here perhaps this part of commons needs to be looked at. For the record, Rod and I are discussing the image, and the background behind his photography, on Flickr, and quite frankly some of the comments above are embarrassing for us as a project. russavia (talk) 06:10, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
russavia, your comments/discussion on Flickr just confirm my comments made initially (which you rejected as non-issues) that it is vital to encourage photographers to nominate their images and take part in the discussion. The above is indicative of how badly a nom can go when the photographer is unable to supply additional information/background. I was uncomfortable with the labelling, which anyone with an iota of knowledge of history would appreciate, but that discomfort doesn't extend to the point where I think it wrong -- I did support after all. I've made no suggestion that anyone might be uncomfortable being "identified as Welayta". It is one thing appearing online in someone's Flickr stream alongside friends and family. Quite another to appear randomly in a category in a database and labelled purely by ethnic group like one is a butterfly specimen. From the discussion on Flickr, I get the impression Rod is considerate of all these things and happy to elaborate on the background. You on the other hand, still seem to think these "non issues". One thing I do agree with you is that Pugilist's comments are unacceptable. -- Colin (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2014 at 21:27:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Observatorio Mojon del Trigo 2014-08-07.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Observatorio Mojon del Trigo 2014-08-07.jpg
Info The observatorio Mojon del Trigo is an observatory, which was built in in 1902 and contained a 32 cm Cassegrain type KYOTO reflector telescope donated by Georgetown University. It is located in the vicinity of Pico del Veleta (3394m) in the Sierra Nevada mountain range in Spain at a height of about 2600m. The observatory was abandoned in the 1970s and deterioated into a ruin as documented by our own Jebulon in 2010, who also was with me on this occasion (thanks for showing me this place!). Since then, the observatory has been restored and is today in good shape (as seen from the outside, at least, I have not been inside). Nearby is also barracks used by the Special Operations Command of Spain. Here, the observatory is seen in evening sun as viewed from nearby Monument of Our Lady of the Snows. From this view point, the modern Sierra Nevada Observatory established 1981 can also be seen, but in the opposite direction. Created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, interesting piece. I feel that the picture is slightly tilted to the right, the plate, the door and the platform indicate that, believe that the platform should be aligned but are tilted at -1.50 degrees. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs14:24, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Lauro Sirgado: Thanks for your review. This is something I considered prior to upload, and I believe I have made the best compromise. The building does not have straight walls. I have chosen to align it such that the left end wall, and the verticals at the door are vertical. The right end wall is inwardly inclined and I do not think you can assume the transition between the salmon painted surface and stune foundation shall be strictly horizontal. It is taken at a focal length of 194 mm, so I do not think perspective distortions come into play either as the field of view is really rather small. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:23, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Slaunger Ok, sorry my preciousness, but considering my background, when I look an precision equipment inclined it jumps me to the eyes, my brain automatically adjust the pivoting platform of the optical set horizontally, and the figure seems a bit strange. : ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs23:06, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lauro Sirgado Absolutely no apologies needed. I spend a lot of time thinking the building looked weirdly distorted when I edited it, scratching my hair. I ended up with an alignment, which I found to be the most plausible, but you may be right too. Unfortunately, I did not bring a spirit level there -- Slaunger (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 07:47:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:17 Years of Sekar Jepun 2014-11-01 72.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:17 Years of Sekar Jepun 2014-11-01 72.jpg
Thanks for the suggestion. I tried going up to about 15 px from the left side of candle in the coconut, but didn't think it was an improvement. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 06:19:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:360° Little planet Latschaustraße 14, Tschagguns.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:360° Little planet Latschaustraße 14, Tschagguns.jpg
Oppose 360 deg panos in this projection do not work for me. I believe the right way to handle 360 deg panos is to have software which allows you to pan around and see the parts you are interested in with more normal geometric proportions. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:13, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 18:33:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Arsenal Objekt 3 DSC 7902w.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Arsenal Objekt 3 DSC 7902w.jpg
Support Well, I just like this kind of architectural pictures... and light is good. I don't think it can get better than that (size appart). Damn post ! - Benh (talk) 12:15, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The vertical lines of this building are very dominant. Making them 100% parallel creates a "tulip effect". Our eyes expect parallel lines to meet somewhere in the distance.--CHK46 (talk) 08:59, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 08:29:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Butrint - Ancient amphitheatre (by Pudelek).JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Butrint - Ancient amphitheatre (by Pudelek).JPG
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 14:17:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Dawn Over Parliament6034 x 3542.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dawn Over Parliament6034 x 3542.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 16:06:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Fishing boats, morning, Beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fishing boats, morning, Beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain.jpg
Support I like the subject very much. I think it's missing just a little something to make it a really awesome image deluxe™. Maybe it's the composition. Maybe it's the light and early morning or evening light would have worked better. I don't now. FP anyway, for me. --El Grafo (talk) 16:18, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
weak Oppose for composition. Why so flat an image when there is so much depth available? Place the camera a bit more to the left to make the coastline meet the horizon beyond the boat. Take a lower vantage point to make the boat look bigger in the image, maybe even make it rise above the horizon. This way it’s just a boat on the beach. Not special enough for FP IMHO, sorry. --Kreuzschnabel09:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your interesting comments and I thank you for review, User:Kreuzschnabel. As I don't share your opinion, I suppose it is here a matter of taste... Please consider to sign your vote, which is not valid for now, as officially anonymous...--Jebulon (talk) 12:59, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček22:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC) sorry for german, in english i cant say this correct: Die Komposition gefällt mir, die Küstenlinie geht nach links unten, das Boot dann nach rechts. Solche Fischerboote mit bunten Elementen sind immer interessant, hier ist es nicht kitschig und zu bunt. Das Grün des Meeres findet sich im Boot wieder. Schöne natürliche Farben. Ich hätte nur den harten Schatten am Boot noch etwas aufgehellt aber das Bild ist auch so schon sehr gut.[reply]
Oppose -- I agree with Kreuzschnabel. The composition could have been better when the photographer had tried out some different angles. It's a pity, because fishing boats make fantastic subjects. Jules Grandgagnage (talk) 15:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would love to see more fishing boat FPs, but the composition (and perhaps the lighting as well) in this one is lacking. -- Ram-Man19:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Quote:"I'm often very pragmatic rather than artistic about taking pictures for Wikipedia, resulting in sometimes "boring" but useful images. My exciting, artistic photography isn't always appropriate for encyclopedia articles"... ;)--Jebulon (talk) 20:14, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no, not boring at all. I think your way to assess is a bit harsh, but I 100% agree with you. My own goal is documentary pictures too, That's why I am on "Commons", and nowhere else.--Jebulon (talk) 22:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I say "boring" from a popular perspective. I may think they are wonderful, but they "have no wow". Sure, it's been 4 years since my last FP, so maybe things have changed, but I attempted to get some of my better "boring" photos featured twice (here and here) never receiving more than 5 votes. However, there are times I really appreciate that it is difficult to get a FP, even if I don't like the outcome. -- Ram-Man22:29, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 17:20:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Ceiling frescos in the pilgrimage church of Maria Langegg (Lower Austria) by Josef Adam Mölk (1773): The Birth of Mary in the sanctuary - The Annunciation - Mary, Salvation of the Sick in the dome - The Visitation - The Assumption of Mary. The interesting illusion painting of the dome is designed to be viewed from the church entrance, thus it looks completely wrong in this view. All by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 17:20, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Try to sharpen it a little. (25-35 with Lightroom) it seems much better to me then. Or go back and reduce Gaussian blur plus a slightly sharpening. Then it will FP for me! --Hubertl (talk) 21:31, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2014 at 07:40:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Support -- Not the most difficult critter to photograph, but well done. The tail is a bit fuzzy, but the nice bokeh makes up for that. Kleuske (talk) 16:03, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is an exceptional shot. The bird in the front stands out against its fellow siblings in so many ways: 1) DOF (of course) 2) wrapped in light while the others are mainly in the shadows 3) while the others are busy feeding, this one is standing up, looking into the sun. Looks a bit as if it had some kind of an enlightening moment. --El Grafo (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is only this FP of this very common bird. I know it's hard to do, but I'd simply vote to delist this one if a better one comes along. For now, I'm fine with accepting this. -- Ram-Man02:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Actually I think it is fairly exceptional as far as composition goes. It isolates the pigeon from the flock, and also shows some of the different behaviours/positions of the pigeon as demonstrated subtly by the out of focus birds in the background. The more I look at it, the more I find it interesting. Diliff (talk) 13:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 14:12:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:St Michael's Mount II5302 x 2982.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Michael's Mount II5302 x 2982.jpg
Support Ok, looking at the picture, rather than the pixels... We've got excellent evening light highlighting just the right side of the castle and picking out the texture of the wooded island hill. The sky is colourful with interesting clouds, reflected in the still water -- which is still enough to reflect the island and display the sand and seaweed. The island is positioned well within the frame with a leading line towards it, helped by the couple walking towards the subject. The wide angle lens, chosen aperture (f/11), and focus distance ensure front-to-back depth of field at the expense of any one portion being pixel-peeping sharp. The overall exposure is just right for an evening sunset. Ok, so putting my pixel-peeping hat on... there's a little green CA on the left of the island and a halo between the land and sky that is either over-sharpening or an imprecise mask. There's a fairly obvious gradient filter on the sky which I personally am not too keen on but is very common practice. At 100% there isn't a whole lot of fine detail, but this is 15.8MP so I can downsize if I like my pixels sharp and this would easily print A4 to high quality. It's a great picture. -- Colin (talk) 22:52, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think neither forum/competition gets it right. A.Savin is right: technical quality doesn't seem to have any weight at WLM, producing winners that cannot be printed or displayed in a gallery without bringing shame. But I think this one image is the wrong one with which to conduct our regular WLM bashing and in doing so makes us look like we are unable to see the picture for the pixels. -- Colin (talk) 08:35, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree with Saffron (and I myself used to pixel peep too much) but it's true that the processing is awful. Hope author sees us and can reprocess and go lighter on NR. Other than that... a beautiful place, superb lighting, very nice composition with the tourist adding some little context. They all mitigate the processing to me. - Benh (talk) 12:21, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I love this image as a whole for the reasons Colin and Benh mentioned above. I also don't have a problem with most of the processing choices and could probably even live with the overprocessed trees on the island. What I can't live with is that thin bright strip running along the horizon, since it's visible even in the thumb of the nomination page in some areas around the castle. --El Grafo (talk) 16:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very beautiful; this is the type of image I'd be willing to accept some lack of resolution for, but my limit is that it must look perfect at 2 MP. Unfortunately, I can still see the effects of NR on the island, which also has large areas of blackness. --King of♥♦♣ ♠ 06:20, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Impressive shot with a lot of wow, but the island looks like a watercolour painting (suffered from NR I fancy), and the foreground objects on the right are entirely oversharpened. --Kreuzschnabel18:56, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2014 at 10:20:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Stortjärnen October 2014 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stortjärnen October 2014 02.jpg
Comment -- I find the foreground amazingly beautiful but somehow spoiled by the background and the curved horizon. I would crop the offending part and only keep the water. Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The ice in the foreground is nice, but the foam is partly blown, and the bokeh in the sea beyond is not nice at all, anything but soft. --Kreuzschnabel09:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't know if it is the blown highlights, the oversharpened appearance (the foreground details are sharp, but indistinct), or the high contrast, but it's not working for me. -- Ram-Man17:43, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 23:35:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Wroclaw-Most Grunwaldzki.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wroclaw-Most Grunwaldzki.jpg
What you are talking about! Exposure bracketing. No tone mapping? Read the Exif. I don´t see any problems with HDR, as long it just support and heal the typical problems and don´t cause eye cancer. --Hubertl (talk) 15:19, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As you mean. What do the Exif say? Its ok, if you like this grandstandig with your HDRs, but for me its not more as a kind of Kitch --Hubertl (talk) 15:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good quality, great composition (look how nice those two towers fits on the right side), beautiful clouds. --CLI (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What do I have to do, when raw RAW file looks like it is 'overprocessed', 'oversaturated'? ;) I've catched great lighting and tried to do the best with these conditions... Make it dull? --Jar.ciurus (talk) 21:38, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
dont bother, the average reviewer is just too dumb to understand the real need of exposure bracketing and the fact that HDR has no advantage over raw. Just do what you do and hide exif. 193.110.198.713:30, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In many situations, properly exposed RAW has enough information to extract good quality picture. There is no need to make HDR like in this case. -- Jar.ciurus18:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2014 at 10:50:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:청자 거북이 모양 주자.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:청자 거북이 모양 주자.jpg
Support - Useful, good quality photograph. May not have the "wow" like some of the other images here, but it's perfect for what it's meant to do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 12:51:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2014 DécaNation - 800 m 13.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 DécaNation - 800 m 13.jpg
Neutral I've been thinking about this for quite a while now and I hate to oppose such a nicely timed shot, but in the end I find that busy bokeh (especially in the large area filled with spectators) just too disturbing. Sorry, --El Grafo (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I agree with you about the bokeh. Sometimes it's disturbing and ugly. I use the new Sigma lense 120-300 mm f/2,8 DG OS HSM (sport version). I'll do some tests because I don't see any thread about this subject. Pyb (talk) 16:49, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I agree that the bokeh is a bit weird. it looks a bit like the photo was shot through an obstacle (the bokeh at the top has a wedge-shaped hole in it), but overall this is a minor issue that would be ignored by most publications so I think for a sports action photo, to oppose for this reason is just too much pixel peeping. Diliff (talk) 04:56, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 19:47:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Kapliczka w Wolanach 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Kapliczka w Wolanach 01.jpg
Support Building and background in perfect harmony. Well done! I tried to add a bit of saturation to get the sky bluer, please try to, looks even finer then to me. --Kreuzschnabel18:36, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 20:45:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Aizkorrira Urbiatik.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Aizkorrira Urbiatik.JPG
Moderate support The crop at bottom would be a matter of taste ... I kind of like the perspective and dynamics it creates in the nominated image. Daniel Case (talk) 14:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2014 at 21:00:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Fountain at Aspang Markt, built 1898 on occasion of the 50th regency anniversary of Emperor Franz Joseph I of Austria. In the background the bell tower of the more than 500 year old church Saint Florian.
Oppose Not bad, but I think it is too tight for a cityscape and doesn't have enough separation for an image of the spring itself (perhaps a longer lens and less fov dof would have helped) --DXR (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support You won´t find WOWs in places like this. Therefore, this picture, which ist technically really good, is exactly as everyone will experience this scenery.--Hubertl (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 13:35:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
weak Support – the entire bird is slightly ot of focus, but still sharp enough. The Weißstorch is crisp sharp in comparison, so better sharpness would have been possible :-) --Kreuzschnabel15:09, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am not sure if the Basstölpel is really out of focus. The lighting conditions at the Weißstorch photo had been better (bird in crisp morning light, background in shadow). The reason for nomination of the photo here was mainly the autumn background with its typical colours. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 11:40:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Brother WP1-IMG 6990.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brother WP1-IMG 6990.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 10:11:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Alchemist-hp: I uploaded a new version with some EXIF data (I couldnt enter though that data in the fields you'd expect). I am having problems with the EXIF tool of my HDR software. I was also ready to enter the geodata but just realized that Kadellar did it for me, thanks Carlos! Poco216:52, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2014 at 18:50:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:CentraalStationAntwerpenEtages.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:CentraalStationAntwerpenEtages.jpg
Question great motive, but I don´t understand your post-processing. See notes. It seems, that you tried to sharpen it, then using gaussian blur. --Hubertl (talk) 04:35, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good composition of scene. But image quality isn't there. I suspect a lot of noise reduction has been applied, which loses detail, and then oversharpened. A slower shutter would have enabled lower ISO. -- Colin (talk) 12:44, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 15:50:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Entrada a Caracas, Venezuela.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Entrada a Caracas, Venezuela.jpg
Neutral Interesting and quite good composition, but also with a lot of noise and a snap-shot feeling. Where you driving (a shutter speed of 1/500, ISO 400 and f/11 seems not so optimal)? -- Slaunger (talk) 21:43, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this a lot more than that one of the same tunnel that I opposed last year from a different angle (was it the same portal? I'm not sure). There's some CA at the top, and it would benefit by being fixed, but it's so small compared to the overall image that I'm not going to complain. Daniel Case (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2014 at 19:11:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Fernsehturm St. Chrischona - November 2014.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fernsehturm St. Chrischona - November 2014.jpg
1219
2112
208
129
2973
4383
white edge.
1536
2211
99
79
2973
4383
white edge
Info all by Wladyslaw. This TV Tower near Basel, Switzerland was finisehd 1984 and became this year 30 years old. It was 1984 the most modern Television Tower in Europe because of many groundbreaking engineering solutions. The very unusual shape makes this building interessting. I took this image last weekend as we had a very nice sunlight and a beautiful autumn scenery. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, its not significant at all, I just wanted to explain what my really little concerns are. In any case, its FP for me. I know, you are a perfectionist and your own detractor (at least with pictures ;-).--Hubertl (talk) 14:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an antenna but a TV Tower; and as I explained a very notable one. If you dislike the object it's not a valid point for an oppose of the picture IMO. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:06, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Antenna , TV , tower, don't know in your country but Italy is full .... and who says it isn't a good reason? For me there is nothing special, if you think it can't oppose not think it's in the guidelines.Regards.--LivioAndronicotalk15:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're too nervous, accepts the criticism and not think that what others say is useless and you the only one to understand something, this game bored me --LivioAndronicotalk08:24, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There’s something wrong with the sharpness. While the top of the tower is crisp sharp and highly detailed, the trees below the tower are very blurry, but the near trees on the right are sharp again, so it’s not a DoF issue (which would be surprising at f/8 and 24 mm). I find that rather distracting. On the compositional site, it’s a good image but a bit too straightforward, leading to lack of wow. --Kreuzschnabel18:18, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but the focus is for sure on the main object (the tower) and not the trees. Apart from that I can't realize a problem with the sharpness, your are the first until now. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:15, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course the focus is on the main object (as I already wrote, if you just read more carefully). I just wonder why foreground and main object are both equally sharp while another area between their distances is unsharp. --Kreuzschnabel21:01, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I read your note carefully. A single shot can never be in every pixel in high sharpness. To claim a every-pixel-high-sharpness is not realistic. This you should now. I see no problem for the picture quality because of some not very sharp tree branches that are not main object. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:11, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but you obviously didn’t read carefully enough. The point is: I just wonder why foreground and main object are both equally sharp while another area between their distances is unsharp – the antennas are of excellent sharpness, and so are the foreground trees, but the trees below the tower (which are closer than the antenna!) are not. Of course a single shot cannot be sharp in every pixel, but if the DoF is sufficient to show both antenna top and foreground trees sharp, then the bottom trees, the distance of which is in between, should be sharp too. This picture appears to have two different focal distances, that’s what distracts me. --Kreuzschnabel04:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If this is the 24-70, this lens shows tons of field curvature at 24, so large parts outside the center will actually be focused closer than the center, therefore nearer objects will be sharper than expected, while far-away subjects are not very sharp at 100% (not that I would describe this as an issue here). This is an example (on a DX!, even worse on a FX)--DXR (talk) 08:15, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for the first matter-of-fact answer to my question! That really explains it, so it’s a weakness of the lens used. As for my opinion about the image, though it’s altogether nice, this one issue still distracts me too much to support. --Kreuzschnabel08:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but this is quite absurd to attest one of the best Nikkor lenses lacking sharpness. No more reason for me to take your comments serious. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:21, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am not discussing your lens, I am discussing this very image. Though the blurred area in it is clearly visible, you keep saying it can’t be there because this is one of the best Nikkor lenses, and anyone saying it’s there can’t be serious. One of the two of us is really making a fool of himself. --Kreuzschnabel12:21, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If the farthest and the closest object in a single frame are sharp, the depth of field covers the entire frame, and so everything in between should be sharp too. --Kreuzschnabel04:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support No wow here, but as a well made illustration for Wikimedia Commons it more than suits its purpose. Who says sharpness is insufficient? Are you guys considering printing larger than life posters? Jules Grandgagnage (talk) 21:50, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment See my answer of 4:26 UTC. Sharpness of the antennas is excellent of course, I never doubted that. But the trees at the bottom of the tower are much too blurred for me, considering that the (much closer!) foreground trees at the right are crisp sharp again, and DoF at 24 mm and f/8 should be ample sufficient to show everything sharp in this frame. --Kreuzschnabel04:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a QI, as it should be, but not a FP. There is no harm in that and it is not the fault of the photographer that it is not good FP material. That said, apparently others feel that lacking a wow factor is still good enough for support votes. -- Ram-Man17:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2014 at 23:57:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 21:37:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Knock-Out-OriginalIMG 3830 Edit.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Knock-Out-OriginalIMG 3830 Edit.jpg
Info This is a submission of a modified version (See the original request). This one is brighter without clipping on the red channel.
Support IMO it is very tough to avoid overexposing the red channel, but the photographer did this without adding undue noise or loss of data. -- Ram-Man21:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral As stated, the technical condition is very good. I find the central composition unimaginative though and not very eye-catching, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2014 at 12:00:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Louvre Cour Carree.jpg/2Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Louvre Cour Carree.jpg/2
Support a 5 years old picture that I finally managed to process in a decent way. Compared to the previous nom, it has less ghosts, better colors, and much better projection, which allows to both show that the place has a square shape and squeeze the wide FOV (~200°) in the frame. Hope it's still up to today's standards. Note that the place seems to be in renovation, and catching the fountain in function is not possible for the moment. Also note that due to extreme stretching on the sides, I cannot provide a bigger version. -- Benh (talk) 12:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As in QIC. Sorry, dear Benh, but I'm not a fan of this kind of deformations (of course on purpose), especially for a Renaissance place which is named "Squared square", this is not very respectful of the will of the architect ! The exposure and light are as usual excellent and very appealing, but the central pavilion is really leaning to the right, left and right crops need more symmetry, and ghosts are too prominent for my taste.--Jebulon (talk) 17:07, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Benh try PTGui (in rectilinear projection), i always get some similar "unwanted" roofs with Adobe. This photo is worth to save. --Mile (talk) 17:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure Benh didn't chose panini general (I guess?) by accident. Rectillinear looks awkward above 120°, and 200° is just impossible physically. I am more worried about the obvious decentering and the asymmetry (or is it reflective of architectural realities?) --DXR (talk) 18:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for the reviews. It's as DXR said. You can't fit this much FOV into the frame with a rectilinear projection (to give a sort of context, the image starts on the left behind the viewer and ends on the right behind the viewer again). It's my choice to get this close to the bassin (for composition), and as a tradeoff, buildings are bended a bit. But I don't think it's this distracting here, and we have many other pictures with similar amount of distortion. I can understand it's not to everyone's tastes. But for the ghosts, I couldn't get a moment without them, or it wouldn't be at dusk (window is small between the moment they start to lit the building, and when the sky gets dark, and many lovers enjoy the moment). You'll have to trust me, but it's already quite an improvement if you could see the raw pictures. I'll only try to fix the symmetry issue, but it may be the building itself. - Benh (talk) 19:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I love the lighting and don't mind curvy buildings. The lights in the pool direct the eye towards the fountain. The pond does rather dominate the picture. Looking at File:Louvre Cour Carrée June 2010.jpg I see the true scale. And File:Cour Carrée (Palais du Louvre) 2.jpg, taken from much further back, shows a more conventional projection (if still rather wide-angle) is possible while capturing the same extent of building. Would a crop 2620 down from the top remove some of the hugeness from the pond (and mostly eliminate the most troublesome ghost)? -- Colin (talk) 20:28, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I must say I think the blueish colors of the pond, etc are overdone and the main buildings too saturated. I like the projection in this one, but much prefer the colors you had in your very first upload of this image in 2009. This is too 500px'ish for my taste, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can sympathize with you on this one. Looking back at the old one, I prefer the colors on that one and the projection used on that reduced the size of the biggest ghost at the front. Perhaps a mixture of Slaunger's suggestion of the old colors and Colin's for a crop? --Muhammad (talk) 02:27, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Colin, I'm not sure I got you for the crop suggestion. I'm looking at the color issue. As a more general topic, I do listen to reviews, that's a reason why I'm here. But for some issues, I won't. The big pound was on purpose from the start, I won't change on that, either this picture gets promoted or not. I like how different of a point of view it provides on the place. Maybe that's what a fly sees => encyclopedic value ;). @Muhammad, saw ur change, but not quite satisfied with resulting projection. I think it's better I do it from my Hugin project files. If I'm not successful but you still think it's worth it, I'll be happy to give away my RAW for you to try. Be back with some changes/fixes. - Benh (talk) 20:20, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Benh, I totally respect that it is your image and creation, so stick to what you intended. Sometimes, we are not ourselves quite sure how best to crop. -- Colin (talk) 21:14, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FixedDXR, Colin, Slaunger, Muhammad, Hubertl, I fixed all issues mentioned above, that is: symmetry, too cool WB and oversaturation yielding kitsch results. I chose not to crop, I like the pound as it. And btw Colin there was nothing personal in my remark. I appreciate your reviews as usual either a support or oppose. Just sometimes we have to stick to our artistic choices as u said. Something I couldn't fix : ghosts. But even though one may not realise, I removed a lot of them already, and for the reason explained above, it's difficult to have none of them in such a touristy place, at such a lovely timing of the day. Maybe some skilled editor could clone the remaining ones out. Thank you for the feedbacks. Quant à toi cher Jebulon, j'essaie de te convaincre : pour obtenir ce point de vue, on ne peut pas garder toutes les lignes droites. Il faut parfois accepter les concessions, de même que ça ne choque personne d'avoir une Antarctique grosse comme deux fois la Russie sur les planisphères ;) (c'est exactement le même problème de projection). J'aurais pu reculer pour avoir qq chose de "standard", mais à quoi bon ? Après si tu n'aimes pas... je dormirai un peu moins bien ;) - Benh (talk) 22:17, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Je comprends que ce type de projection ne permet pas les lignes droites, mais je suis choqué que la courbe du fronton ne soit pas symétrique: ça penche à droite, c'est incontestable. Et rien ne me devrait s'opposer à ce que ça soit droit, sauf une erreur, la même qui fait d'ailleurs que les deux pavillons sur les deux côtés ne peuvent pas être coupés symétriquement, sauf à risquer de décentrer l'image. Regarde-toi dans le dos d'une cuillère, tu comprendras. Mais pas de quoi gâcher ta nuit ! 😴💤💤🌌🌃--Jebulon (talk) 23:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)--Jebulon (talk) 23:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hep hep hep ! Je vois que tu as amélioré les choses, mon commentaire ci-dessus n'est donc plus valable, tout est bien "droit" comme il faut! Dès que je ne serai plus sur tablette, je regarderai tout ça avec grande attention.--Jebulon (talk) 23:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 09:56:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Melker Altar - Ecce homo.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Melker Altar - Ecce homo.JPG
Info Melk Altar in Melk Abbey Museum: Ecce homo. Painted 1502 by Jörg Breu d. Ä., photographed, uploaded and nominated 2014 by Uoaei1. Note that the darker stripe in the lower right corner is on the painting itself. -- Uoaei1 (talk) 09:56, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2014 at 11:15:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Motorboot im Schärengarten.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Motorboot im Schärengarten.jpg
Info small police boat patrolling in Stockholm's archipelago in the early morning summer light creating beautiful traces in the water - all by: -- CHK46 (talk) 11:15, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, its off-topic but its not a Swedish police boat. Swedish police use three types of boats in Stockholm; 3 CB 90 H/CB 90 E, 2 of this type, and three RIB (source). All painted in blue and white, and built for high speed (over forty knots).
The boat has as far as I understand basic navigation light: green light on the starboard side, red light on the port side, and a white (not blue) light placed at least 1 metre (according to Swedish rules) above the side-lights.--ArildV (talk) 00:32, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's sharp, though. There's a guy in a hoody and sunglasses behind the wheel... This guy may actually be running from the police. I concur, it does not look like a policeboat to me. Unless it's undercover, of course. Kleuske (talk) 15:58, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2014 at 05:58:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Question Can you provide some precise informations on the place where the photo is taken, and to put these informations on the file descriprion. It will be better also with a geolocalisation, and category(ies) for this location. -- Christian FerrerTalk / Im. / Fav.07:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do like the sharpness of the lizard's face. The the green background is has serious posterising (banding) problems. -- Colin (talk) 20:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Banding. The bokeh is uncomfortable to my eye. The area of focus on this picture is very small and the out of focus elements are distracting. -- Ram-Man02:57, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2014 at 17:05:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Palazzo Vecchio by nigth.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Palazzo Vecchio by nigth.jpg
Info Florence landmark Palazzo Vecchio. Nigth view from Michelangelo hill, Florence, Italy. Telezoom used, nothing much changed, full size and croped. All by -- Mile (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Info I know it lacks some sharpness, but i left it in 14 MPx. Dunno, was very windy up on the hill that day, tripod is more like toy (too ligth). --Mile (talk) 17:26, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 08:06:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Pont sur l'Orb, Roquebrun 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pont sur l'Orb, Roquebrun 02.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 23:33:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Return of the moon diagram.svgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Return of the moon diagram.svg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 11:03:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Ripon Cathedral Rood Screen, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ripon Cathedral Rood Screen, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpg
53
963
5873
4144
5939
5120
I preffer this cut
Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. The rood screen of Ripon Cathedral is believed to date back to around 1494. Through the arched doorway in the centre is the choir and the eastern stained glass windows. Diliff (talk) 11:03, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe you should make a luxurious book with all those magnificent pictures, for Xmas...Sure you will find an editor (I'll buy one !)--Jebulon (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 23:28:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Roti vesiveski hooned ja pais 2010.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Roti vesiveski hooned ja pais 2010.jpg
4214
693
314
87
6500
2198
more stitching problems, and branches of trees having funny gaps
Oppose Very fine angle of view. Lacks detail though (blurry/smeared look of surfaces, maybe noise reduction overdone?), and the snow areas look blown. Can it be re-processed? I’d prefer to see a bit more on the top side too. --Kreuzschnabel18:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I still see them. There is an entire section of tree trunk that is floating off to the side of the rest of the trunk. It's screamingly obvious at full-res. Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 03:26:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:SQM GE 289A Boxcab Carmelita - Reverso.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:SQM GE 289A Boxcab Carmelita - Reverso.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 11:09:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Salisbury Cathedral Lady Chapel Ceiling, Wiltshire, UK - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Salisbury Cathedral Lady Chapel Ceiling, Wiltshire, UK - Diliff.jpg
Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. I've considered nominating this image in the past as it's always been among my favourites from Salisbury Cathedral, but I wasn't sure that the unusual angle and projection would be well received here. Given the success of my previous nomination which had a similarly unusual angle, I thought I'd give this one a try. The focus is on the ceiling of the Lady Chapel, but the projection, which is spherical, and the wide angle of view allows you to see the stained glass windows of both sides in such a way that would otherwise be impossible with a regular rectilinear projection. Diliff (talk) 11:09, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very pleasing design. I don't mind if it becomes somewhat abstract due to the odd projection. A similar situation occurs with macro photographs that can be like nothing any human could visualise. However, neither the file title nor image description gives any clue as how the distorted view is produced/configured. I sometimes stick "fisheye" in my filenames to make it clear this isn't a regular projection. But at least the image description should say something, perhaps linking to or explaining the projection chosen. -- Colin (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 13:51:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Sella plateau with Piz Boe.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sella plateau with Piz Boe.jpg
Oppose We have many mountain snowscape featured pictures (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.). This one is flat and boring in comparison, consisting of mostly white with relatively low texture and wild shapes (aesthetic features). The fact that it is a panorama makes it more illustrative, but at the same time limits its visual impact: my eye is drawn the the left side, but there is "action" on the small object at the top and the tiny skiers on the right. -- Ram-Man17:58, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ram-Man. I think it could do with cropping away most of the foreground and the heavily-tracked snow, which is an unpleasant contrast to the mostly unbroken snow with the scattered skiers along slim tracks that we see elsewhere in the scene. Daniel Case (talk) 06:18, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This crop is definitely better than the original, but I still feel it is flat and boring and does not meet or exceed older FPs. -- Ram-Man16:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 13:25:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 21:28:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Viborg by night 2014-11-04 exposure fused.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Viborg by night 2014-11-04 exposure fused.jpg
Info The southern part of Viborg, Denmark as seen from the east across Søndersø (Southern lake) by night. Viborg is one of the oldest cities in Denmark, with Viking settlements dating back to the late 8th century. Some prominent buildings are mentioned in the annotations on the file page. Created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 21:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to give my very personal opinion about pictures like those: I am always impressed to see, how much work it is, to make really good pictures. It simply requires a deeper understanding not only in dealing with the technical side, but also in the understanding of how the two will play together. Light and technology. I want to express, that good photos are only very rarely randomly taken - mostly it is more than just a shot. Naturally, it includes intuition in the question of motive selection. But if you are able to master the technical side - like this and in most cases too - then you will get the head free for that, what the world can offer. BTW, when rotating this image 90 degrees to the right, I see a perfect design for a futuristic, green skyscraper. But in this case, it is bad cropped at the top ;-) --Hubertl (talk) 09:17, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that comment Hubertl, it made my day . I am techically very happy about this photo as it is the first time after many failed attempts that I have managed to get a succesfull multiple exposure panorama, which spans a large dynamic range from the almost completely dark sky to the strong point light sources from street lamps. It is also my first serious attempt with my new prime lens, a Canon 40mm f/2.8 STM (a birthday present, thank you, wife). All photos were taken at the maximum aperture and up to the maximum exposure time of 30 s, and I am happy that even at this large aperture the image quality is till very good with no noticeable CA. One of the lessons I have learned is to keep my not-so-rugged tripod with less long legs at a lower kneeling height, to make it more rugged, make sure it is not very windy and tighten the grip very tight to avoid shutter snap. And of course use a timer to avoid vibrations from physical manipulation (I do not have a remote control). And thanks for the futuristic sky scraper observation, LOL, I had not seen that, but you are right! I can, by the way provide a wider crop as I have much more to the left, it just got a little boring and made the aspect ratio too extreme if I included it. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Livioandronico: Thanks for your observation - you are right that it is quite purple. I have used a "Canon Flourescent" whitebalance of 4050 K because the lamps are the main light source. I do not know exactly what the origin of the slight blue/purple color in the sky is. Maybe city light, maybe a little reminescent "twilight" (we are at 9:30 pm). To the eye it looked very black and it was only in the 30s shutter time, f/2.8 exposures that this dark purple color casted sky was visible. It did not come out as a result of the exposure fusion (which does not mingle with the colors, unlike HDR tonemapping, which I also tried, but which gave artificial looking results)-- Slaunger (talk) 20:05, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment After LivioAndronico comment, I tried with lightroom to increase the vibrance, for to look a the tint, and it's true that the sky, and it's reflection are very purple. On my PC I solved the issue by putting the purple color tint on the blue side, the result is more neutral sky. The image can also maybe benefit from a little increase of the contrast, clarity and vibrance IMO. It's a fine and pleasant image. -- Christian FerrerTalk / Im. / Fav.06:14, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Christian Ferrer: Thanks a lot for trying out tweaking the image. I could do the same manipulations. However, I feel reluctant to get rid of the purple colors, as I see it in the developed raws at the largest exposure and it appears to be there for real. My initial edit had more "impact", by a more agrressive use of clarity and vibrance as proposed, but for me (and especially my wife, who critized it for being 'unrealistic') it just did not represent well enough "how it is". I kindda think it looks cool with the dark purple sky, so I think I will keep it as is, but of course respect if other reviewers find it is not acceptable. -- Slaunger (talk) 17:38, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hubertl: Hmmm... actually the differing distance is not a challenge if there is good line of sight as is the case here. With a subject distance at 500m, and even with the large f/2.8 aperture the DOF is very high and extends from 30m - ∞ (the hyperfocal distance is at 30 m) for the given focal length and camera according to an online DOF calculator. Muhammad Mahdi Karim actually has a point that the resolution is not as large as one could have expected for stitch from an 18 Mpixel camera. This is due to the fixed 40mm focal length of the prime lens. It has a somewhat wide vertical fields of view, which is larger than optimal for the scenary at this viewing distance. Thus, quite a lot of sky and foreground lake and grass has been cropped out in the end result. A 60 mm prime lens would have been more optimal for the field of view of the scenary, I just happen to only have a 40mm prime lens. So, I can certainly follow the observation of Muhammad, whom I highly respect as a photographer (it is more than seven years ago I had really useful input to him, you remember Muhammad ;-) ), I just personally think that the end product has a more than sufficient resolution for FP. -- Slaunger (talk) 16:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 13:33:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2014 at 18:47:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Zion Thompson.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Zion Thompson.jpg
Oppose It's hard to take pictures of people singing w/o making them look silly (i've tried and failed, too). This attempt did not succeed. The lighting is suboptimal, too. Sorry. Kleuske (talk) 12:33, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 19:21:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Хотинська фортеця - мури, башта.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Хотинська фортеця - мури, башта.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 20:56:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Antwerp Astridplein Colors and forms.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Antwerp Astridplein Colors and forms.jpg
Sure, but we generally agree upon that such vertical lines should be corrected for Commons. Of course you can have your own opinion, but it is an acceptable reason for declining. --DXR (talk) 12:46, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While I do not agree that any straightening need occur, the composition and subject are very unclear to me. Are the colorful objects the subject or is the building on the left? Why are the colorful things cut off? I'm not feeling any "wow". -- Ram-Man03:59, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 09:59:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 12:55:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kudat Sabah Fuk-Tek-Kung-Temple-01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kudat Sabah Fuk-Tek-Kung-Temple-01.jpg
Comment a bit dark IMO (underexpo ? Lack of clarity or vibrance ? I don't know, for sure it can be improved) excellent subject and sharpness though.--Jebulon (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 08:27:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Madonna with child and angels.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Madonna with child and angels.jpg
Info All by by Livioandronico2013Giovanni Battista Salvi da Sassoferrato (August 25, 1609 – August 8, 1685), also known as Giovanni Battista Salvi, was an Italian Baroque painter. He is often referred to only by the town of his birthplace (Sassoferrato), as was customary in his time, and for example seen with da Vinci and Caravaggio. His paintings also show the influence of Albrecht Dürer, Guercino, and above all Raphael. He appears to also have been influenced by Pierre Mignard, whom he may have met in Rome in the 1630s.-- LivioAndronicotalk08:27, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Good, but it looks like it is cropped (see the aureole of the Virgin Mary). I've the feeling I miss something, and I don't know how is the whole painting. Good caption indeed, and good categories (I've added another one, btw...)--Jebulon (talk) 11:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comment Jebulon, I didn't crop the picture, I simply removed the frame (which covered part of the aureole for that matter) would be extremely stupid to cut by removing a part of the picture if visible. There would be no reason, thank you. --LivioAndronicotalk16:07, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ok, I'm convinced, and I changed my vote into a support. My advice: when possible, don't crop all the frame, but let remain a very little part of it, then the viewer knows that he sees the wall painting, like here, for instance.--Jebulon (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 16:36:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Parus cristatus.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Parus cristatus.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 16:07:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 23:55:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/Pensive Bodhisattva 01.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/Pensive Bodhisattva 01.jpg
Info The Gilt-bronze Maitreya in Meditation is a gilt-bronze statue of what is believed to be the Maitreya, the future Buddha, in a semi-seated contemplative pose. It is commonly referred to as the Contemplative Bodhisattva or Gilt-Bronze Seated Maitreya in English. It is the National Treasure of Korea No. 83. The statue is widely acknowledged to be one of the finest Buddhist sculptures ever produced and is a masterpiece of Korean art. It is now housed at the National Museum of Korea and is one of the most popular exhibits there.(en:Gilt-bronze Maitreya in Meditation (National Treasure No. 83)) created by 국립중앙박물관(National Museum of Korea) - uploaded by Lawinc82 - nominated by Lawinc82 -- Lawinc82 (talk) 23:55, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I oppose here for formal reasons, because set nominations are currently disallowed. So this are in fact two separate nominations (your 2nd and 3rd active nomination). --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:48, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2014 at 06:21:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Tenancingo market in mexico.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tenancingo market in mexico.jpg
Oppose Sorry. I love this, but I just want more depth of field, especially in the foreground. It looks fabulous as a large thumbnail at least. -- Ram-Man04:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 13:37:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Zbislav (Zhoř) Okres Písek 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Zbislav (Zhoř) Okres Písek 01.jpg
CommentJules Grandgagnage - Thanks for comment. To be honest, I do not know. I tried to WB the original image, so it might be true that I overdid it, but I am not really skilled in post-processing so is there some possibility to fix this? And if yes, how? Or the image is wasted without a chance? :) Best regards --Chmee2 (talk) 16:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is a rather good composition, although I think it could be improved further by cropping of a bit below such the black road/snow line such intersects the lower left corner. I like the co-existance of green vegetation of sizeable height and snow. It is unusual. The technical quality is not quite good for enough for FP these days though in my opinion. Focus is soft and texture of plants look artificial as a if a little too aggressive noise reduction has been applied. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 15:27:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Eristalinus June 2014-1.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eristalinus June 2014-1.jpg
Support I prefer this,the subject is very very clear,the rest isn't important fo me is the subject is good,but i don't like when background (in this case the flower) is cut. Very Nice.Good job. --LivioAndronicotalk16:12, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 17:05:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Evgenia Kanaeva RUS Olympiasiegerin.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Evgenia Kanaeva RUS Olympiasiegerin.JPG
Regretful oppose RG is a beautiful, underappreciated sport and by rights we should have a dozen FPs of it. So I'd very much like to support a picture this well composed. However, as noted above, it is noisy and I also find the gymnast's lower legs to be unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 03:09, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2014 at 17:58:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kreuz - Monte Piana 2.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kreuz - Monte Piana 2.jpg
Comment Please make sure that the picture in full resolution is shown in upright position - currently its tilted by 90 degrees. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral After looking at the context (this image), I find the composition lacking. It looks nice, but a FP? I feel that a different angle or frame would have been superior, but I can't put my finger on it. Also the image description is quite sparse, it is only in one category and it's not used in any articles. It could use some help to increase its value. I really like the lighting and mood. -- Ram-Man04:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 14:47:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Maker unknown, India - Krishna and Radha - Google Art Project.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Maker unknown, India - Krishna and Radha - Google Art Project.jpg
Support The intimacy in an intense relation is very brilliantly portrayed. Even I, as a cultural ignorant can appreciate that! Excellent technical quality and notable subject. The cropped feather Jebulon mentions is a bit annoying, agreed. When seeing the source material linked to the file page, it becomes evident than a wooden frame begins right where the feather ends. So it is not a bad crop as such, but as crop a crop as it can be given the frame, thus acceptable for me. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:01, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 13:53:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:NLA, Lausanne HC vs. Rapperswil-Jona Lakers, 11th November 2014 03.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:NLA, Lausanne HC vs. Rapperswil-Jona Lakers, 11th November 2014 03.JPG
Support Much better and difficult than the gymnastics one here in FPC, why one gets support and the other one doesn't remains a mystery. --Kadellar (talk) 17:36, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 15:13:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:San Juan Valley.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Juan Valley.jpg
Support San Juan Bautista Valley is located on Isla Margarita on the hillside Copey (La Sierra) at a height of 1,000 meters above sea level. Because of its mild climate and its quiet mountain town has the slogan Silence laborious and evergreen .All by -- The Photographer (talk) 15:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little unsharp along the ridgeline at the far right, but I'll chalk that one up to the mist. Overall an ideal image to put on the desktop in the winter months in temperate latitudes. Daniel Case (talk) 21:34, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It had rained a few hours before, I am inclined to think that this is Drizzle. Formerly back hills were full of clouds, however, for some climatic effect clouds have disappeared to make way for this Drizzle and foggy, five years to the present --The Photographer (talk) 23:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 14:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Spire of St Walburge Preston.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Spire of St Walburge Preston.jpg
Info A vertical panorama of the spire of St Walburge's Church, Preston. It is the third tallest spire in the UK, after those of Salisbury and Norwich cathedrals, and yet, despite its grandeur and size, somewhat of a hidden gem. 4 frames, stitched in Hugin. All by me -- Baresi F (talk) 14:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 17:31:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:WLM14ES - Molinos La Mancha - Hugo Díaz-Regañón.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:WLM14ES - Molinos La Mancha - Hugo Díaz-Regañón.jpg
WeakOppose It's a beautiful scene, but I don't like how the two or three structures on the right intrude on each other. Hurts the composition. Even were it impossible to get the shot from a different angle, I don't think that's enough of a mitigating factor for me. -- Ram-Man18:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think this composition is nice because it compresses the windmills in the image, so they don't appear too loose. The obscured windmill is so obscured that there almost seems to be six instead of seven, so it's not a problem for me. --Kadellar (talk) 14:11, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would be even nicer if the mills on the right would not obstruct each other, but lots of whow and still a very great and perfectly done shot. --Kreuzschnabel18:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose I havent see upper link, windmills are leaning. And there already is FP of it. Wouldnt mind to plus it, just some corrections. --Mile (talk) 08:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wow!!! Thrilling ending!! Thank you all very much for your support and comments. I'll tell the author that it's been featured. --Kadellar (talk) 17:50, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2014 at 21:46:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Whale Shark AdF.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Whale Shark AdF.jpg
Info Like most underwater images of large animals, the resolution is not the best, but I think the drama and the uniqueness of the image more than compensates. This image was taken at 1am, when the whale shark came close to our boat to filter-feed on a cloud of plankton. Strobes are not allowed with whale sharks (and would be useless, given their size) so the only ilumination was coming from the floodlight of the boat. all by me -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 21:46, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice pic but I don’t particularly like 1: the blue/yellow fringing (visible at the mouth, and at one small fish near the bottom edge) and 2: the crop (too tight at the bottom, nearly cutting the fin). --Kreuzschnabel06:52, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thanks Kreuzschnabel for your comments, I agree, the image is far from perfect from a technical point of view, given it was taken in the middle of the night, with only one source of zenithal light. However, the situation is so rare and unique - face portrait of whale shark feeding with open mouth etc - that I thought it would more than compensate the technical shortcomings. But if others think like you do, I am happy to withdraw nomination... --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 09:26, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That’s why I didn’t oppose. I am indifferent about this image as yet, and I don’t know enough about underwater photography to judge if the colour fringes are avoidable. --Kreuzschnabel11:41, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The value of this picture is so high that I can accept technical issues. Is there a chance to solve any of them, especially the fringing? --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2014 at 23:22:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
I have waited like five months to nominate these three diagrams as a set, bc it makes literally no sense to nominate them in series (especially since there’s an odd number, so the third one whould have to stand FPC in isolation). Technically set nominations are disabled (as a…half-year-long “stopgap”, when new rules were supposed to be adopted within one month) but I can already see that as it stands that’s going to be forever basically so I’m just going to be bold and offer these antarctica diagrams as a set anyway. Since they constitute a sort of frame animation, and portray the same thing at different times, I do not believe they’re in the gray area that led to FPCS shutdown last June, and it’d probably attract more hate to nominate them separately than as a set. If you really must follow a should-be-expired-by-now ban, feel free to think of the three cutaways as a single collage—Love, Kelvinsongtalk23:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe that a more darkened blue ocean's color for more contrast with the ice would not be bad and will make a more hard-hitting image. And of more, in the reality, the ocean's color is (often) darker. -- Christian FerrerTalk / Im. / Fav.08:05, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2014 at 22:46:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Kłodzko, fontanna przy pijalni wód mineralnych.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2014 Kłodzko, fontanna przy pijalni wód mineralnych.JPG
Oppose I could live with the blown lights if only they wouldn’t have been so severely overprocessed (posterizsation, oversharpening). Really nice scene though. --Kreuzschnabel05:25, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2014 at 19:36:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Basel - Hohenfirstenhof.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Basel - Hohenfirstenhof.jpg
Yes? It feels really tight, and there's definitely a reason why I'm the only one who's commented in over a week. A limit of the environment, but that doesn't make for wow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You’re right, I apologize for being childish. The image: I don’t have the slightest idea what’s supposed to be special about it. It’s a well-done pic of a nice house crammed between some others in a narrow lane. I don’t see any fancy compositional idea, any special perspective or lighting about it. --Kreuzschnabel11:32, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 16:34:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2014 at 09:26:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info The Calvary was built in 1685 and the Crucifixion Scene was added in 1759. It was recently refurbished (2009-2012) and is one of the most important baroque monuments in Austria.
Weak Support. What bothers me a bit is that the three chapels on the right partially hide each other. Maybe a photo taken from another position would be better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for review and voting. For your comment: You are right, but ... standing more to the right would hide the Crucifixion Scene; more to the left makes things even worse as can be seen here. The only reasonable improvement would be a higher point of view. --P e z i (talk) 14:09, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2014 at 15:32:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Karl Ernst Papf - Children - Google Art Project.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Karl Ernst Papf - Children - Google Art Project.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 18:21:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Leopard Tree AdF.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Leopard Tree AdF.jpg
Question Isn´t it a little too much yellow? This is not just the only problem, it´s partly extreme over- and underexposed (You have the RAW?). With the JPG, there is no chance to fix it! --Hubertl (talk) 18:36, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks a lot Hubertl, you are absolutely right. I have updated the file, after substantially reducing the overexposed areas. Now it look a bit dark but this makes sense given the thick vegetation. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 19:48, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2014 at 07:36:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Lincoln Cathedral Rood Screen, Lincolnshire, UK - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lincoln Cathedral Rood Screen, Lincolnshire, UK - Diliff.jpg
It is centred properly, the problem is that the building itself is not symmetrical. The columns on the left are physically nearer to the centre of the screen and organ than the columns on the right. You can see it clearly, the doorway on the left behind the column is partially obscured by the column, but the doorway on the right is not. The nave (where the photo was taken from) is laterally shifted compared to the rood screen and the choir behind it. You can also see the shift in this image. Diliff (talk) 13:37, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 16:56:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Maslenitsa kustodiev.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Maslenitsa kustodiev.jpg
"Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy...
Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject."
I don't know much about art, so I can't say with certainty the artist is a "major artist" but Boris Kustodiev has a Wikipedia article, which is noteworthy and suggest he is an important Russian artist. Otherwise, I think this certainly meets the second criteria above. -- AHeneen (talk) 05:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is above the size limit, but image is still rather small. Wouldn't it be practical to require more than mere 2 Mpx from a photo, that is taken from a static object, like a painting? Kruusamägi (talk) 22:15, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2014 at 15:18:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:NeXT Pizzabox-IMG 7227.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:NeXT Pizzabox-IMG 7227.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2014 at 13:07:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:S-Bahn at Hauptbahnhof Berlin.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:S-Bahn at Hauptbahnhof Berlin.JPG
Support Excellent, and even more so when one has been there and can personally vouch for this being a good, representative image of the place. Daniel Case (talk) 23:53, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
hmm, I don't know, I've applied a very moderate sharpening. Decreasing it again might turn out problematic for corner and border sharpness. So I better leave it as it is. It's always a compromise... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:55, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, honestly, that's beyond my technological expertise, I'm afraid. Anyway, I also believe that the oversharpening is really not that bad here. I didn't notice it at all before you mentioned it. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The image has nothing to say except that its creator has the capability of playing with exposure time and maybe IrfanView. It has no relevance at all with regards to content, but all the relevance possible with regards to vanity. The standard displayed is too low for the image to be regarded as exceptional. --89.247.68.9904:25, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2014 at 08:47:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:St Albans Wallingford Screen 2, Hertfordshire, UK - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Albans Wallingford Screen 2, Hertfordshire, UK - Diliff.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2014 at 17:54:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/Tampa Florida November 2013-3aCommons:Featured picture candidates/Tampa Florida November 2013-3a
Info Tampa, Florida. View to downtown during the morning (subtract 4 hours from Exif time). Compare with this picture, taken just after sunrise and already featured. I believe the present version also deserves the star. Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Based on a similar rationale as above. It's good to disclose the existence of the other FP, but I think that here the wow is missing a bit. Quality is of course great, but without the evening light, the towers are quite plain. Reminds me a bit of my own experience with this and that. --DXR (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support In contrast to the view expressed by DXR, I think that the lighting (not during dawn/dusk) is a positive aspect of this picture and doesn't detract from the "wow factor". The evening lighting is slightly distracting from the subject--the Tampa skyline. This image doesn't add a false yellowish tone to the buildings like the sunset photo does (compare the white buildings in this photo vs that appear light brown/tan in the sunset one). There's also less glare off the buildings that are more reflective. It does have a "wow factor" if you look at it from the perspective of focusing on the subject—the Tampa skyline—in that it is a great quality image which manages to show most of the subject in an accurate way (no false color from dawn/dusk). The only possible improvement would be mid-day lighting in summer to eliminate the shadows. I don't support de-listing the sunset image, but if others find it necessary to only feature one, this is the one to feature (just a suggestion, but again I don't support doing that). -- AHeneen (talk) 05:08, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Isn't there a slight blue or green cast? Check WB, please. I also think it is a bit plain, not because of the light, but because of such a clear sky. --Kadellar (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I made several experiences because I also had the feeling that the picture was a bit greenish. In the end the adjustements were minimal as I realized that many of the buildings had in fact a green cast. The obvious exception is the white parking below Sun Trust. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:59, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded a corrected version with the restaured exif data that was embedded in the original file (Photoshop has a bug when “save for the Web”). I made also some little additional color and curves corrections. Sting (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2014 at 15:57:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Kardoen (Cynara cardunculus), Locatie De Kruidhof 05.JPGCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kardoen (Cynara cardunculus), Locatie De Kruidhof 05.JPG
Weak Support I really wish there was more depth of field, but (at 60mm, f/11) I'm not willing to require focus stacking for a FP and I like the composition. -- Ram-Man04:12, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2014 at 06:17:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:2013-Sonnenobservatorium-Goseck.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:2013-Sonnenobservatorium-Goseck.jpg
Info The Goseck solar observatory is by now the oldest known solar observation circle in the world, having been discovered and restored just recently. I came along in the warm morning light of a grand day and so had the chance to take some nice shots of it. --Kreuzschnabel06:17, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I have had a look at the thing (online) and I guess that I would not have a much better idea for photographing it. Yet, I feel that the image is not featurable if the commenters above think that the motive is just some random fence, not the instrument itself. Perhaps a view from an elevated position would be good or perhaps trying to offer a look through one of the openings, but obviously an ideal image is hard to get here. --DXR (talk) 16:10, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As I often say, I can see what you were thinking. But perhaps you should try a different time of day. The high contrast between the sides is very jarring to the eye and isn't necessary for understanding the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 17:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Really nice and not bad however the composition is a bit unbalanced IMO, too much shadow, even if shadow is not an evil, on the left part. -- ChristianFerrer08:32, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2014 at 00:27:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Beria.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Beria.jpg
Oppose Light on her right side is too bright, and generally it’s an unfavourable portrait IMHO, not really a charming expression. The bright background doesn’t bother me though. --Kreuzschnabel10:50, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
CommentSorry, I cannot. It’s just a feeling. Maybe it’s the pursed lips. Anyway, while it might be "good", it’s still not a wow portrait for me. --Kreuzschnabel21:17, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2014 at 20:23:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Comment The license for this image is not compatible with FPC. If it is acceptable, I'll relicense it to the CC-BY-SA 4.0 if the image is featured. I think that will meet with the standards? -- Ram-Man21:07, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2014 at 08:11:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Calliphora vicina, u, Face, DC 2014-04-24 -17.46.02 ZS PMax - USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Laboratory.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Calliphora vicina, u, Face, DC 2014-04-24 -17.46.02 ZS PMax - USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Laboratory.jpg
2661
225
397
204
4109
3218
it seems to be overlaying onto the eyes, is this real or a focus stack problem? Very nice image.
Comment First of all: wow!, otherwise, there is some stacking/stitching problems in the bottom middle left part (see note). Is there a way to fix that? Poco219:05, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2014 at 02:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Caminandes - Gran Dillama - Blender Foundation's new Open Movie.webmCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Caminandes - Gran Dillama - Blender Foundation's new Open Movie.webm
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2014 at 08:16:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Christus carthusian.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Christus carthusian.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2014 at 15:09:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info This is one of the few preserved classic ballrooms of Vienna, situated at Parkhotel Schönbrunn, 13th district. It's also used as a conference room.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2014 at 01:46:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
OpposeSorry to spoil the party but I really think the harsh flashlight and the cast shadows caused by it don’t do a favour to the subject. It’s certainly an illustrative and good shot but not outstanding IMHO due to lighting. --Kreuzschnabel11:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is good practice to ask instead of criticizing directly, it is best to assume expertise, hoping to demonstrate the contrary. It is the spirit of good faith and assertiveness. This comment is not for you, it's for everyone including me. --The Photographer (talk) 16:40, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As for me, I should be very happy without reading, after some support votes, the first opposer beginning his explanation with :"Sorry to spoil the party"...as a mantra. Thank you !--Jebulon (talk) 21:30, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Done. I just feel some urge to apologize, being the only one to have a different opinion of an obviously otherwise highly appreciated nomination. --Kreuzschnabel05:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2014 at 00:48:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2014 at 12:33:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Reindeer Ljungris October 2014 02.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Reindeer Ljungris October 2014 02.jpg
InfoPanning shot of 2 reindeer running in the in the mountains in Ljungdalen, Sweden. The image is cropped (but no downsampling), reindeer are very vigilant (bear, wolf, wolverine and lynx are constant threats to the reindeer in the wild) and and difficult to get close to by foot. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 12:33, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Enthusiastic support As noted this sort of picture is difficult to get, so kudos to you, Arild. I don't usually go for animal pictures, even well-done ones, because it's so easy for a skilled enough photographer to get a very good one that we rarely see great ones. And this is great because of the high EV—we are not only seeing wild reindeer, scruffy, dumpy and not idealized Christmas creations; we are seeing them in their natural habitat, their motion telling us that they cannot take it easy here, and the light and the background explaining their coloration to us far better than any words in any language ever could. Daniel Case (talk) 17:22, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WeakSupport. I think think the image is a little too bright (especially the fur), but a shot like this is definitely not easy to get. --King of♥♦♣ ♠ 02:20, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2014 at 22:01:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:SAN JOSE CALIFORNIA PALM TREE 2010.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:SAN JOSE CALIFORNIA PALM TREE 2010.jpg
Strong oppose: What a pity! So nice a light and idea, but so poorly performed. Heavily oversharpened (showing bright red fringes on outer sides of tree trunks and lamps from sharpening of chromatic aberration), and there’s chroma noise all over the dark parts. The overprocessing kills it for me. Sorry. If the author still has kept the original, it may be reprocessed, eliminating the chromatic aberration before doing anything else. --Kreuzschnabel11:21, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2014 at 23:48:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Val Mont dal Ega y Ncisles.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Val Mont dal Ega y Ncisles.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2014 at 22:08:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Vendôme (Loir-et-Cher).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vendôme (Loir-et-Cher).jpg
Comment I see several issues here, despite the nice view. The sky has blown parts, there is some perspective distortion and there's also CA. Not the best light neither, because the buildings are actually in shadow. --Kadellar (talk) 12:44, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2014 at 15:26:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Vilivalla kalmistu Harjumaal.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vilivalla kalmistu Harjumaal.jpg
Support I like this. Lighting is nice, composition is fun, colors are pleasant. That said, it does appear to be either a slightly overdone HDR or very strange natural lighting (i.e. the center of the photo). -- Ram-Man04:19, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Info created and uploaded by Chensiyuan - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Support -- ArionEstar (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Past-processing not perfect, Colin? There are extreme purple CAs on the background silhouette and all around the trees on the rocks. There are also artefacts of oversharpening at the sky area. I am missing a clear compositional idea - surely the rocks are impressive but imho arranged in a random way. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:16, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Neutral The chromatic aberrations are quite notable especially on the right but also on the left. They are possible to fix. I wonder if the white balance is ok. The photo seems quite... yellowish. Is it like that for real? --Ximonic (talk) 16:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
chromatic aberration, overprocessed, poor detail, low resolution and uninteresting composition of 95 % blue areas, sorry – the sky would be much more interesting with some clouds in it :-) Try to shift the horizon out of center next time. Either more sky or more ground, but 50:50 is a boring view in most cases. And I’d suggest to consult QIC before putting up a nomination here – an image failing QIC would have to be very special to success here. --Kreuzschnabel 10:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment Not a Diliff but not too bad either :-) There’s a perspective problem though. The chain of the chandelier is not vertical though I am pretty sure it ought to be. --Kreuzschnabel 19:58, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Done I corrected tilt. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
--LivioAndronico talk 09:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination - Thanks for the comments, I can see this isn't going to pass. I'm still learning quite what does have a chance at FP, so all comments are useful. Except those which aren't, but there weren't any of those here. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:03, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.JPG)
Question Is it a normal light traffic sign at the very right? The red cross looks somehow retouched. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
--LivioAndronico talk 22:18, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
_3.jpg)
-- Slaunger (talk) 20:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Keep -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 16:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Barn swallow, (Hirundo rustica).
Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus).
Handmade soap
Mandrill (Mandrillus sphinx)
Oak (Quercus robur) forest
Egeskov castle, Denmark
Running scandinavian brown bear (Ursus arctos arctos)
.jpg)
_running.jpg)
--LivioAndronico talk 10:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.JPG,_featured){kind=link}
_3.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
_01.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_Okres_Písek_01.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
,_Locatie_De_Kruidhof_05.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG,_featured){kind=link}
.JPG,_featured){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_3.jpg){kind=link}
_3.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gjirokast%C3%ABr_Castle_(by_Pudelek)_4_-_Clock_Tower.JPG){kind=link}
_3.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_no){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg,_no){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:St_John_church_at_Kaneo,_Ohrid_(7809249656).jpg){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Sv._Jovan_Kaneo_-_Ohrid,_Makedonija.jpg){kind=link}
,_%C3%A9tudi%C3%A9e_comme_Femme_de_race_B%C3%B4chismann,_Histoire_Naturelle_des_Mammif%C3%A8res,_tome_II,_Cuvier,_Werner,_de_Lasteyrie.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG)
.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg)
Overexposed --The Photographer (talk) 23:23, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Awesome! --LivioAndronico talk 12:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Fixed DXR, Colin, Slaunger, Muhammad, Hubertl, I fixed all issues mentioned above, that is: symmetry, too cool WB and oversaturation yielding kitsch results. I chose not to crop, I like the pound as it. And btw Colin there was nothing personal in my remark. I appreciate your reviews as usual either a support or oppose. Just sometimes we have to stick to our artistic choices as u said. Something I couldn't fix : ghosts. But even though one may not realise, I removed a lot of them already, and for the reason explained above, it's difficult to have none of them in such a touristy place, at such a lovely timing of the day. Maybe some skilled editor could clone the remaining ones out. Thank you for the feedbacks. Quant à toi cher Jebulon, j'essaie de te convaincre : pour obtenir ce point de vue, on ne peut pas garder toutes les lignes droites. Il faut parfois accepter les concessions, de même que ça ne choque personne d'avoir une Antarctique grosse comme deux fois la Russie sur les planisphères ;) (c'est exactement le même problème de projection). J'aurais pu reculer pour avoir qq chose de "standard", mais à quoi bon ? Après si tu n'aimes pas... je dormirai un peu moins bien ;) - Benh (talk) 22:17, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
_2.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG)
.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
_%26_Mont_Blanc,_2010_July.jpg){kind=link}
_01.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_01.jpg){kind=link}
_01.jpg)
_01.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_01.jpg,_featured){kind=link}
_Okres_P%C3%ADsek_01.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Okres_P%C3%ADsek_01.jpg){kind=link}
_Okres_P%C3%ADsek_01.jpg)
_Okres_Písek_01.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
_Okres_Písek_01.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
,_Locatie_De_Kruidhof_05.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
,_Locatie_De_Kruidhof_05.JPG){kind=link}
,_Locatie_De_Kruidhof_05.JPG)
,_Locatie_De_Kruidhof_05.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
,_Locatie_De_Kruidhof_05.JPG,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg)
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
.jpg,_not_featured){kind=link}
