Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2013

File:Chloroplast (standalone version)-en.svg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2013 at 16:40:33

Info I redrew this diagram for scientific accuracy. Renomination (because only one person voted last time—seriously is it that hard to replace an FP with a more scientifically accurate one?). (Original nomination).
Delist and replace —Love, Kelvinsong talk 16:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --P.Lindgren (talk) 17:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace - Another amazing SVG diagram by Kelvin (is this where my support vote goes??) KDS444 (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --El Grafo (talk) 13:23, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Kadellar (talk) 18:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New

Borderless

Result: 7 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --A.Savin 16:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vienna University of Technology DSC1189.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2013 at 18:58:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by P_e_z_i - uploaded by P_e_z_i - nominated by P_e_z_i -- P e z i (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- P e z i (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak Support - while not very extraordinary (ok, that's subjective, I might have seen this building too often IRL), deserves FP status simply for being well-lit, which is only possible for this building in the early morning hours of a few days around the summer solstice. darkweasel94 11:37, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Slight barrel distortion. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The building is tilted clockwise but the pillars are not tilted, strange pic... --Laitche (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. A.Savin 17:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:MiG-17 - Chernyshka, Perm kray, Russia.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2013 at 18:53:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by AndreyIGOSHEV -- AndreyIGOSHEV (talk) 18:53, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- AndreyIGOSHEV (talk) 18:53, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but the title has to be like ...Chernushka... (and also the category!) instead of Chernyshka (Чернышка ;-) --Amga (talk) 12:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. A.Savin 17:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Donbas arena construction panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2013 at 09:45:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Piotr Zarobkiewicz - uploaded by Piotr Zarobkiewicz - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 09:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kasir (talk) 09:45, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Benreis (talk) 11:55, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 17:53, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:54, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:18, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  12:21, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice, but there's CA at the right side, is that fixable? --Kadellar (talk) 12:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, very nice, but sorry: no FOP in Ukraine. --Jebulon (talk) 14:50, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- FP-Candiature isn't really the place to note that, cf. Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#Influencing statements during voting. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, it is a good place. Why not ? The discussion quoted above is far from consensus, as I see... I think reviewers must know this interesting fact: there is no FoP in Ukraine, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 20:07, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - The non-consensus is mainly on whether it's reasonable to forbid it or just say it's bad. If this is a copyvio, what you should do is put a copyvio on it. If it succeeds, it's deleted, if not, then not. Either way, this FP nomination can proceed and doesn't have to do anything with that. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 20:12, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion, not mine, sorry. Everybody is free to continue to support this picture until promotion. Btw, the DR is on way.--Jebulon (talk) 20:27, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buitrago del Lozoya - 04.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2013 at 17:13:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Buitrago del Lozoya, Community of Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 09:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 12:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. --Laitche (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:53, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:14, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Duchamp (talk) 09:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not eligible to vote. 50 edits are needed. --Joydeep _Talk 18:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Poc o² 21:48, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Canal de la Peyrade, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2013 at 20:52:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Paris 16
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much!-- Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:37, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice.--ArildV (talk) 12:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 12:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. --Laitche (talk) 14:18, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 14:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:51, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jebulon (talk) 21:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would be better with a bit more of exposure Poco² 21:48, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks very much for you opinion, but I have some problems with my software and if I want to change anything I must begin another the entire editing --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:46, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Thatched cottage in the sand dunes by Denmark.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2013 at 21:10:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:10, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:10, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:10, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LC-de (talk) 09:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- wrong coordinates. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 09:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, I removed the wrong coordinates. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:08, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:51, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 18:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:14, 17 September 2013 (UTC) sehr schön, warum hast du rechts das Gebäude abgeschnitten?[reply]
- Eine lange weiße Mauer führt von dem reetgedeckten Gebäude fort und ist für das Bild ohne Bedeutung. Deshalb habe ich den Anfang der Mauer nur angedeutet. Mir war die Integration des sandbedeckten Gebäudes in die umliegenden Sanddünen wichtig. Die Mauer hätte die Dünenlandschaft zerschnitten. Statt der Mauer nahm ich die Sanddüne links vorn in das Bild hinein. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 11:15, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I withdraw my support because of last version. --Ivar (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I've supported, but the sky looks "burned" at right.--Jebulon (talk) 20:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The white clouds are not overexposed. See the bird on the white cloud and the glimpses of blue sky in the white cloud. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry, they are. About a quarter of the sky is fully clipped. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jebulon. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see the new update. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:42, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - That doesn't work, you have bad banding now. If you manage to smooth that out, it would be good. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info I made a new update from my NEF-image (RAW). The sky is not clipped and has no banding.
Support That's an improvement, very good. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 06:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 10:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 11:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 11:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice mood Poc o² 21:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Definitely better, I agree. But I don't feel wow enough... I remain neutral, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 23:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

Image:GP2-Belgium-2013-Feature Race-Sam Bird.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2013 at 11:52:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Malte89N - uploaded by Malte89N - nominated by Malte89N -- Malte89N (talk) 11:52, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Malte89N (talk) 11:52, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support dynamic! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:37, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poc o² 18:20, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Typical house in El Maco, Margarita Island.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2013 at 11:38:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info -- The Photographer (talk) 11:38, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sharpness, composition. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vajdahunyad vára Budapest September 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2013 at 09:58:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by me -- Felix König ✉ 09:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 09:58, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot, reflection could maybe be in a less awkward place. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 12:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An attempt to add to the article is reverted. :( J Kadavoor J e e 14:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Joydeep _Talk 20:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 16:33, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:26, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Duchamp (talk) 09:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not eligible to vote. 50 edits are needed. --Joydeep _Talk 18:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Don't you participate in WLM? Add {{Monument Hungary|16291}} and the Hungarian template. --Kadellar (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:2013-09-13 18-51-24-petite-fontaine-belfort-PA00101137.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2013 at 09:04:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by ComputerHotline - uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by ComputerHotline -- ComputerHotline (talk) 09:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ComputerHotline (talk) 09:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Barrou Neighbourhood, Étang de Thau, Sète 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 17:11:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:11, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:11, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good! --Ivar (talk) 18:08, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:17, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 10:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 19:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:25, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support good view --Rjcastillo (talk) 12:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:30, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Warsaw 07-13 img24 Old town.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 12:46:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by A.Savin 12:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:52, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 16:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:24, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not really getting excited about a bit of wall, sorry. Plus the man tying his shoelaces and the woman in the vivid magenta top are distracting. Colin (talk) 17:33, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Needs a crop at right, excluding the little wall and the magenta lady. Something is wrong in the post processing of colors (sky), looks overdone, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The colourspace is AdobeRGB, which is unsuitable for Commons/Wikipedia. Most people will be seeing the wrong colours -- though mainly at the red end rather than sky). Colin (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Info Done Cropped at the right, the stooping man has gone. I'll not change the profile to SRGB: I tested it, it spoils the colours. --A.Savin 21:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that if you see a significant difference between sRGB and AdobeRGB then you computer isn't set up correctly. Provided you shot in raw, both sRGB and AdobeRGB JPGs should display virtually identically in a decent image viewer like Photoshop. Google the issue and you'll see nobody recommends AdobeRGB for internet JPGs. Fine for sending a JPG to a print lab. But nothing else. Colin (talk) 21:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment OK, I think I know what you mean. New versiobn = same steps, beginning with the raw. Colours seem fine now, pls. another look. --A.Savin 22:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to remember to look later at home. I think Commons needs a essay/guideline on colourspace. Colin (talk) 12:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The subject is very vague here; not focused on the town or the walls. :) J Kadavoor J e e 09:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poc o² 18:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Церква Святого Пантелеймона 17.jpg, not featured[edit]

Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Klymenkoy - uploaded by Klymenkoy - nominated by Шиманський Василь (talk) 07:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Шиманський Василь (talk) 07:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 18:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Acraea zetes caterpillar to pupae to butterfly metamorphosis by Nick Hobgood.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2013 at 19:46:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Nhobgood - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a pity for the not very big size and resolution, but I support for this good valuable work, Very good IMO -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can't see the source images at Category:Acraea zetes; so doubtful about the validity of the license per Commons:Collages. ~~I agree, this is not the place to raise licensing concerns though.~~ J Kadavoor J e e 06:24, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Avenue's advice. The resolution of individual images are low; but I like life cycle series!. J Kadavoor J e e 14:39, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Kruusamägi (talk) 16:57, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 21:06, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support but I wish it was bigger. Useful picture of the process. --Kadellar (talk) 11:35, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 13:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Ardea cinerea 2013-09-16.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2013 at 13:43:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Laitche (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great --LC-de (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice picture but denoising has been excessive. ISO isn't that high, I'm sure we can pass without noise reduction. Could you rework that please? --Kadellar (talk) 15:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The noise level is not so high but I uploaded the without noise reduction version, this version is not noise reduced at all. You can see the noise level. (This version is not exactly the same as current version's process, cause I don't remember the process which I did...) And I think current version is better :) --Laitche (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2013 (UTC)--Laitche (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay I got what you want, I reworked to the without noise reduction version and new version uploaded. --Laitche (talk) 18:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Or you need this (Processing from RAW by Photoshop CC - Pre work version.) --Laitche (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, that's what I "need" It is far more detailed!!!! --Kadellar (talk) 08:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Far detailed than File:Ardea cinerea - Pak Thale.jpg. J Kadavoor J e e 08:05, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --Ivar (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 14:42, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 20:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose And support alternative, its level of detail (see the feathers!!) is much higher. --Kadellar (talk) 08:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, after so many versions I can Support both. But see the difference between this one and the original, I knew there had to be more detail ;) Thank you and the others too for reworking. --Kadellar (talk) 11:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for alternative. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:34, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info I uploaded new version.(Processing from RAW by Lightroom.) --Laitche (talk) 18:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Support alternative. Much finer detail. Just take a look at the feathers. --Kadellar (talk) 08:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe you can darken the darkest parts (water) like in the other version. --Kadellar (talk) 08:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IMO the first is much better --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Feathers have no texture in the first picture. --Kadellar (talk) 11:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I like the "legs" in the first version. Feathers; I think that is noise, not textures. J Kadavoor J e e 15:25, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info I uploaded another alternative version, please revert, if it's not better. --Ivar (talk) 14:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support this one. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:33, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:39, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support For Ivar's version --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info I worked for the Ivar's version and uploaded new version. (If you need to revert, please do so.) --Laitche (talk) 18:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Reverted to Ivar's version. --Laitche (talk) 20:41, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks Ivar. --Laitche (talk) 18:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info This version is a bit noisy so I re-processed from RAW by Lightroom and then uploaded new version to the first version. --Laitche (talk) 18:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In this version the overexposed areas are more noticeable Poc o² 21:37, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

The chosen alternative is: File:Ardea cinerea 2013-09-16.jpg

File:The Petronas Twin Towers & KLCC Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2013 at 12:33:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ahmad Rithauddin - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- russavia (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An impressive subject sure, but some way technically below the typical standard for architectural shots. Colin (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is cropping of an author's copyright notice/watermark considered kosher on Commons? I thought that would be construed as violation of attribution in the manner specified by the author. Saffron Blaze (talk) 02:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Short: Yes. Long: There is a proposed guideline at Commons:Watermarks, and it widly practiced on Commons, since the licence authorize it (Derivative works.). Pleclown (talk) 10:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Commons:Deletion requests/Template:CC-Dont-Remove Watermark discussion is relevant to some degree, though the attribution text on the image description page is not equivalent to the attribution on the photo itself. Colin (talk) 11:15, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the crop made for a better pic, but if the author wants this as his form of attribution then it would violate the license terms to remove it. Saffron Blaze (talk) 14:43, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it would not. This is a misunderstanding that results from reading only the license deed ("in the manner specified by the author or licensor), not the actual license. CC-BY-2.0, which this is released under, says in section 4b that [s]uch credit may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided, however, that in the case of a Derivative Work or Collective Work, at a minimum such credit will appear where any other comparable authorship credit appears and in a manner at least as prominent as such other comparable authorship credit. Disclaimer, I'm not a lawyer. darkweasel94 15:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed (pun intended), but it is easy to see where the confusion comes in. Hopefully in the next iteration of the CC license they tidy up that wording on the deed. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:52, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Every Wikimedian is bounded by the agreement "You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license". I discussed this matter with a Creative Commons staff, and the reply was it is enough for any CC license irrespective of whether the use is in WMF projects or not.

Extended content

“It might be useful for you to look at the legal text of the license.
See section 4.b.: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode

It requires that the licensee provide:
1. The name of the original author
2. The title of the work
3. To the extent practical, the URL of the original work
4. If the work is an adaptation, a credit to the original

Those are the literal requirements for attribution, but they can be
implemented in any number of ways as is reasonable to the medium. In
the case of Wikipedia, all of this information is provided on a page
for each image. There's no special rule for Wikipedia.

For more information and recommendations on attribution, see this
page: http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Marking/Users”

J Kadavoor J e e 16:30, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of us are happy to have the attribution moved, though the wording shouldn't change like it has here, and remember that in the case of Flickr transfers, the author bound to any Wikimedia terms of use contract at all. Colin (talk) 19:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean to say "in the case of Flickr transfers, the author is not bound to any Wikimedia terms of use contract at all." That was the reason behind my discussion with them. If the answer was different, we can't use third party uploads in articles or galleries as we don't use attributions on those pages. So I think that answer is very important. J Kadavoor J e e 05:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Landsort Lighthouse August 2013 09.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2013 at 21:27:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Landsort lighthouse, the oldest lighthouse in Sweden, and the part of the Landsort coast artillery battery (command bunker, and 2:nd gun. Used 1938-1960s). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 21:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 00:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 12:24, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:54, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I want this lens. :) — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:32, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ A little oversaturated perhaps. (Dates in the EXIF look a bit screwy). Colin (talk) 19:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The battery in my laptop is dead (every time I insert the power cable and start it, it says the first january 2001). Date and time from the camera is correctly, ~~no extra saturation was added~~ sorry, I checked the final version in lightroom again and a small amount saturation was added. Regards --ArildV (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well I've decided I like it anyway. Btw: the clock is preserved by a button cell in your laptop, which can be replaced for pennies (you may need to unscrew the base, but no skill required). Alternatively, you may be able to get a program to sync your clock in an internet timesource on startup. Colin (talk) 21:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:47, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:48, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Top, as usual Poc o² 23:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 12:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support This deserves recognition for the absolutely noiseless sky alone. But, oh yeah, it's a great picture besides. Daniel Case (talk) 16:06, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Central Californian Coastline, Big Sur - May 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2013 at 21:08:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 21:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 21:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- Kurkoe (talk) 02:32, 20 September 2013 (BST)

Your vote doesn't count - less than 50 edits. Gidip (talk) 00:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:54, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but this picture doesn't do justice to this beautiful place. Colors are muted and washed-out. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:36, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 00:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:34, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Aporrhais pesgallinae 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2013 at 15:17:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 15:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice layout (and detail). --Kadellar (talk) 16:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:47, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 18:57, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:48, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:34, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ArildV (talk) 21:41, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another fine addition to our already fine gallery of galleries of shells. Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 21:04, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jebulon (talk) 08:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Brackenheim (talk) 10:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jonathunder (talk) 22:35, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:The two bridges.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2013 at 15:14:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Frank Schulenburg - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 16:53, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:47, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - nice composition and probably not an easy shot. Jonathunder (talk) 17:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:39, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 19:51, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ArildV (talk) 21:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kurkoe (talk) 02:23, 20 September 2013 (BST)
Support J Kadavoor J e e 08:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 12:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:33, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Whoa! --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:36, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Citron (talk) 17:00, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:30, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:44, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pile-on Support Great contrast between the dark old bridge and the light new one. Daniel Case (talk) 05:09, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Natal RN Brasil - Ponta Negra.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2013 at 13:24:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Beraldo Leal (Flickr) - uploaded by Affleck - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 13:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kasir (talk) 13:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too many blown parts and tilted. I also find the blurry trees (due to the wind) at the front disturbing. --Kadellar (talk) 16:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kadellar. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lights too blown and palms at bottom distracting, as noted. But even if those issues weren't there it's just too cluttered as currently framed. If you are able to try again, consider cropping out the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 05:11, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poc o² 18:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mexican army soldier.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2013 at 01:35:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:35, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:35, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Neptuul (talk) 07:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Really nice picture, but what is the white halo on the right ? Droplet on the lense ? Pleclown (talk) 11:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poc o² 18:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Templo Wat Arun, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 30.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 22:18:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Ordination Hall with Yaksha guardians in the Wat Arun Temple, Bangkok, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 22:18, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 22:18, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 06:30, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 10:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment nice image and technically well executed. But imo the crop is a bit too tight on the right side. Why did you cut off the branch? Comment by Martin Falbisoner Poc o² 21:31, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I see your point, but to me that branch does not play a significant role in the composition. I cannot restore it but could cut more of it off Poc o² 21:31, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support This won't be necessary. The branch isn't that important. FP anyway. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 22:01, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cut trees OK; ~~but a front view will be more ideal.~~ J Kadavoor J e e 06:50, 20 September 2013 (UTC) I see your attempt may be to show some important aspects of the roof which is not visible in the front view. J Kadavoor J e e 06:55, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 12:25, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:47, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Not the best composition - very cluttered, poorly cropped side trees, depth too low.Fotoriety (talk) 00:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I find both crops and composition nice, that branch isn't so important. --Kadellar (talk) 11:18, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:29, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Semargl - Tak, Kurwa Uncensored.ogv, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 22:13:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Semargl - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 22:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- russavia (talk) 22:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Stable image: Agree
- Framing: Agree
- Visual clarity of subject: Agree
- Highly illustrative: Excellent example of its genre Agree
- Free of distractions: Agree
- Color: Agree
- Audio: Agree
Support Michał Rosa (talk) 03:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Professional quality videoclip. --Kadellar (talk) 11:20, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until criteria for this sort of thing are defined. The guidelines for featured video were clearly written for documentary-style videos of a subject, whereas here the pop video is the subject. As such, the above checklist is pointless. Our guidelines for "Artworks" would appear more suitable but this is not a reproduction, rather it is the artwork. The work itself is not notable. While it may be an example of its genre, I'm struggling to see what distinguishes it in any way to make it a "featured" example of its kind. The ev is made more limited by its sexual content, which limits where it could be realistically used [This isn't a comment against hosting such content -- just that it obviously limits its value compared to some other video of the band playing]. The world is full of non-notable professional music videos -- this one's main defining feature seems to be its free licence -- and I don't think being "professional" is a sufficient condition for FP - . Colin (talk) 18:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This isn't a non-notable music video, but a music video by a notable Ukrainian band (uk:Semargl). Also, we don't really deal with educational value here on Commons in such things, that is more a Wikipedia notion, what we deal with more is the technical aspects of the images/video. Also, sexual content isn't relevant in this regard either. The "checklist" by Michal Rosa above has merit. russavia (talk) 03:57, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Very few pop videos from any band are notable in themselves (to the extent, say, they could have a WP article in their native language). I highly doubt this one qualifies. So let's not claim it itself is notable. The band may well be notable, but that's another matter. The point, when comparing the "Artworks" criteria, is it fails "Notable in its own right" -- the subject isn't a great work of art that the world values and admires and comments on. The second criteria "Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are none the less wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art." Again, I don't think there is anything special about this video that qualifies it on that condition. And the third possibility is "Of high historic merit" seems also unlikely. And it isn't an illustration so the last criterion doesn't apply.
  - The "ev" is an absolutely requirement on Wikipedia but is still a quality to be judged on Commons (and frequently is) -- we are a repository of educational material after all. We've rejected self-made artistic photographs and drawings before because of their limited ev even though they might do well on Flickr. The FP criteria require the picture to be "valuable" and in that sense it is its value to use as educational material. This video can be used on the band's article would be hard to use elsewhere. If it weren't so sexual it would have more value as it could illustrate music genre articles too. So I do feel that its content limits its value to the project and that counts against it. It is professionally made, though the studio setup is low budget.
  - But more importantly, we have the fundamental difference here between reviewing a great reproduction of a subject and the subject itself. We simply haven't agreed a set of criteria for judging the latter, nor have we even agreed that such works fit into the FP process. What if a band were to release all their videos and songs with a free licence. Would we "feature" all of them automatically because they were professionally made? What if people released adverts under a free licence? On en-wp we had a current movie poster once at FP (the real digital poster, not some scan) and iirc there were copyright doubts about it and a unease we were publishing promotional material. I think the FP process needs to discuss whether such material is featurable and what criteria we should set -- merely being one of so few donations so far doesn't really cut it imo. Colin (talk) 09:43, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Colin. Further, unlike COM:POTD; COM:MOTD doesn’t require a "Featured video" as a pre requirement. So you can post it at any empty slot available there without nominating here. We rarely feature some Featured videos ; which are heavily used in WMF projectsto document something. JKadavoor Jee 00:06, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This isn't being nominated so it can appear on the front page of Commons, it is being nominated because it is a high quality video, and meets requirements as they stand right now. Also, it is in use at uk:Semargl, and it simply requires that article to be translated into other languages and it would likely see use in those articles too. russavia (talk) 03:57, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - High quality is only a pre requirement (QI) and sometimes neglected if override by other exceptional merits. Since this is an art work, it should be “Notable in its own right”, “Of high artistic merit”, “Of high historic merit” or “Of high illustrative merit” to qualifies an FP. This is definitely a QI; but QIC accepts only works of Wikimedians now. The only notability as “the subjects of a controversy” I see here is its sexual content; but that is very common in pop videos. J Kadavoor J e e 14:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I wonder if we should be a bit less critical with videos given so few of this quality are made free? Saffron Blaze (talk) 02:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Offcourse; but I failed to see any "exceptional merit" here. Let us see "other opinions". :) J Kadavoor J e e 14:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose ... per Colin, per Jkadavoor. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - if / when the new featured media criteria are implemented, this can be reassessed; for now, the video meets them undoubtedly. Óðinn (talk) 01:27, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing against the technique, nothing against the contents but nothing of remarkable --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:17, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kadellar --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:40, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like neither the music, nor the explicity, nor the aesthetic appeal presented in the video. I do, however, appreciate the technical quality of its production as well as I consider the sheer fact that there are only very few pop videos published under a free license. So there is an obvious educational value. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak support per Martin Falbisoner. darkweasel94 21:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow. Not my taste, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 22:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak support Decent production values and quintessentially (or cliché) Death Metal themes. Anybody that decides to watch can't seriously complain about the content. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pleclown (talk) 11:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak support - If one asks me what death metal is, this is all I need to show them. However, I'm not quite crazy on the song chosen as it's not one which is important in international music, international death metal, or even Polish or Ukrainian death metal. A more significant song (one which charted, one which is considered a classic or milestone in the genre, etc.) would have my full support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing remarkable, it does not make this video special that few pop videos are published under a free license --Salvör Gissurardóttir (talk) 06:50, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing remarkable --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poc o² 18:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alentejo September 2013-1.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 21:42:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Typical country sight of the Alentejo, the Portuguese region south of River Tagus. The trees in the foreground are cork oaks (Quercus suber), together with the remains of a cut wheat field . In second and third plan we can see vineyards (Vitis vinifera) and olive trees (Olea europea). Wheat, cork, olive oil and whine are the most typical productions of the Alentejo. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:00, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw the nomination. I agree it is exciting enough for the normal non-Portuguese viewer -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:52, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vila Viçosa September 2013-10a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 21:31:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info The main façade of the Ducal Palace of Vila Viçosa, Portugal. The outside walls are all covered with different types of marble from the region. The whole façade of the building is shown here. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Duchamp (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not eligible to vote. 50 edits are needed. --Joydeep _Talk 18:06, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:46, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Artistic. --Laitche (talk) 19:53, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:55, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:32, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Laghetto Moesola und Hospiz am San Bernardino Pass.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2013 at 20:31:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info San Bernardino Pass and Laghetto Moesola; c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 20:31, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 10:22, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 15:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:50, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:25, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support good view --Rjcastillo (talk) 12:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:22, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:56, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Petit Trianon Belvédère Sphynge 2.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 15:27:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Azurfrog - uploaded by Azurfrog - nominated by S t a r u s – ¡Dímelo! – 15:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- — S t a r u s – ¡Dímelo! – 15:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Oppose Just an average statue. The sloping building on the left is distracting as are the trees behind. Colin (talk) 21:42, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Prawn Nebula from ESO’s VST (wide crop).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 12:38:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by ESO, u\n by — Stas1995 (talk) 12:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Stas1995 (talk) 12:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment File size is 434 MB. — Stas1995 (talk) 12:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Vernon Estate Mansion 2.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 07:54:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the people on the porch. Another one for WLM USA 2013, I think. Daniel Case (talk) 05:03, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clouds, tree, building work well together. Colin (talk) 21:44, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The clouds provide a nice path for the eyes to the tree and then to the house. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Paris-10-ardt-Eglise-Saint-Vincent-de-Paul-DSC 0455.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 00:16:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Pline - uploaded by Pline - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 00:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 00:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Tilted and overprocessed. Pleclown (talk) 10:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the symmetry is missed! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 12:05, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Villy Fink Isaksen -- Colin (talk) 21:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:David Villa - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 00:01:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Spanish football player David Villa celebrating after scoring a goal for Atlético de Madrid. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:42, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:01, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:47, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ArildV (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support sublime! a picture at the height of Villa Maravilla :) Poc o² 23:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Some CA on the loose lace at his waistband, but that's being really, really picky. Great picture of a celebrating athlete. Daniel Case (talk) 05:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:35, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:44, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Templo Wat Arun, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 37.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2013 at 20:38:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Night view of the Wat Arun Temple, Bangkok, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 20:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 20:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice night shot. --Kadellar (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:36, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:44, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support You almost fully documented Wat Arun! J Kadavoor J e e 14:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:47, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:12, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great.--ArildV (talk) 21:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 21:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 14:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Pont Saint-Joseph, Agde, Hérault 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2013 at 18:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A mass of tree leaves dominate. Bridge not pretty enough and the road furniture and overhead wire are intrusive. Colin (talk) 21:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IMO the tree leaves give it a certain charm and for the road furniture I had tried at maximum to integrate its in the composition and I think the result is not so bad with the elements of the place. But I don't understand : this bridge is not pretty enough?!? -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can certainly see you tried hard with composition -- it isn't random. The path through the bridge, with the fence leading the eye, is a nice device, but the shadows on the path and past the bridge don't help the eye to follow or give any reward for looking through the arch. Perhaps if the sandy path was in full sunlight, it would lead the eye better. Only a third of the bridge is in light or clear of trees. Colin (talk) 12:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks very much for this interesting analysis, really... -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Muralla de Buitrago del Lozoya - 18.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2013 at 17:16:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Walls of Buitrago del Lozoya through one of its gates, Community of Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 17:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 17:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment CA on the top of the gate -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done New version now, I hope it's better. --Kadellar (talk) 19:33, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The compositional idea is good and interesting but for me there is too much "empty" / uninteresting space from the wall. For my personal taste the main motive (the castle) should definitely take more space. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree with Tuxyso. A portrait crop and you might have a winner. Colin (talk) 11:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment There's an alternative picture below. I prefer the first picture because composition is more original and because I like the contrast between the dark wall and the outside, which was very bright, so it catches your attention. It also follows the so loved rule of thirds. --Kadellar (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I think, though, the space on the right is too distracting to allow the eye to naturally fall into your frame, but not interesting enough to warrant the attention it then gets. -- Colin (talk) 12:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IMO this one is much better but there is always CA --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Kadellar (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info I already uploaded this alternative version. --Kadellar (talk) 12:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:24, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 12:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for your support. --Kadellar (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Kadellar (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tower of London viewed from the River Thames.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2013 at 15:15:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by -- Bob Collowân (talk) 15:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowân (talk) 15:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support And I've added to the WP article. -- Colin (talk) 17:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 04:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe VI too (for South views). --Kadellar (talk) 10:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:08, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:47, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 18:00, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support French caption added.--Jebulon (talk) 20:32, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pile-on Support Wow. It should really be in a tourism brochure. Daniel Case (talk) 05:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely composition. Well done. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for all your kind comments :-) --Bob Collowân (talk) 17:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:36, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Mainau - Ausstellungen Zauberer und Feen - Fliegendes Bett 001.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2013 at 04:07:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Mummelgrummel - uploaded by Mummelgrummel - nominated by Mummelgrummel -- Mummelgrummel (talk) 04:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mummelgrummel (talk) 04:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too dark. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done I have uploaded a version with more brightness. --Mummelgrummel (talk) 16:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peter Thomsen Barny cross country London 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2013 at 00:39:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Renominating as the last nomination didn't garner enough votes. created by Sffubs - uploaded by Sffubs - nominated by Nikhil
Support -- Nikhil (talk) 00:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A very nice action shot, but overexposure/clipping is too strong imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:21, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please specify where did you feel the image was overexposed, so that I can verify before nominating any other pic? Nikhil (talk) 11:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All the parts of her white clothing are clipped. Please note that that's not so much a feeling as a fact, as these areas have a color value of 1 and therefore do not show any structure, shading or detail any more. Ideally, in such a situation, a slightly underexposed photo can be taken and then brightened to this brightness in RAW-processing, only leaving the brightest areas untouched and thereby making sure they aren't clipped. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paisley Abbey from North West - Leaning western gable - 125mp.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2013 at 21:31:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Colin - uploaded by Colin - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 21:31, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high resolution image of Paisley Abbey and grounds. More details on the building's defects and the photograph are on the image description page. -- Colin (talk) 21:31, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing. Great work. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:22, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I do not like the lighting. Entering the coordinates into suncalc.net suggests that this would be possible with far better lighting on evenings around the summer solstice. At the same time, it's ok technically and the wow factor is also there. darkweasel94 10:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What Suncalc doesn't show you is that to my right/rear is Paisley Town Hall. A huge building that would cast most of the grounds and abbey into shadow for the date/time you suggest. For a 3d object, there are various lighting directions that put some faces into light and some into shadow. Lighting from behind the camera might have fewest faces in shadow (assuming no obstacles like a town hall) but will also be completely flat, so many of the carved details will be far less clear. I have taken some pictures further round, which are in full light, but obviously are of a different view. Will try to upload them this week. Ideally, I'd also want to be further back to minimise the wide-angle effect, but you can see that the two street lamps would then obscure the abbey when taken at ground level. What I need is a big crane.... Colin (talk) 11:36, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- Why does the right facade look like it's tilting downwards?Fotoriety (talk) 00:07, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is. Paisley's own "leaning tower of Pisa" the western gable leans disconcertingly and is quite wonky. See this frame that made up the above picture, taken with the camera level and is unadjusted. See also this shot from straight-on, showing how it leans to the side too. And there's this Geograph photo take side-on.
The lamp-post leans the other way. Damn that lamp post.
The wide angle of view doesn't help. A wide angle rectilinear view (whether from lens or projection) "corrects" x/y-axis vertical and horizontal perspective "distortion" but doesn't adjust perspective in the z-axis (depth). The effect causes the near corner to look more dominant than reality and the far corners to recede more than reality. For an extreme example, see St Pancras Station. The only solution is to get further back, but that has its own problems with lamp posts and statues and trees obscuring the subject. This is the furthest I can get, for this viewpoint, while still getting an unobstructed view.
Most views of the abbey have a degree of vertical perspective "distortion" -- the verticals lean inwards -- which nicely masks the issue. -- Colin (talk) 07:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Like the details in lights; but don't like too see an entire side on shadows. I can see the details in a larger view; it is disappointing in a smaller size. Do you have the view from the opposite side? I would like to evaluate again after seeing your other views that you had promised to upload later. J Kadavoor J e e 04:39, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will try my best to get them soon. Colin (talk) 07:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support After seeing all the views. J Kadavoor J e e 16:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

weak Support Very difficult to evaluate. On the pro site: The quality is really good, the stitch (I guess) quite complex (did you use a nodal point adapter?), the level of detail is (not surprisingly) VERY good with 125 MP. Contra: The photo looks not really appealing in thumbnail size, the lightning is unfortunate (more than a half of the building is in shadow). If it would be only 16 MP I had definitely voted with contra. But all in all your great work should be honored and the high level of detail is very useful for educational usage. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Tuxyso. I think this subject benefits from the detail as there are so many features to explore. For example, at the nearest corner of the tower is a carved face with hair like the Wella logo, which wouldn't even register as a dot on a normal photo. I agree the lighting isn't optimal but I don't live there so can't keep visiting at any date/time, and one can't guarantee the weather on the west-coast of Scotland. Pictures on a rainy overcast day might be useful but (understandably) people don't tend to go wow then. Perhaps next year I'll be luckier, or perhaps it will be covered in scaffolding...

I took the picture by hand. Perhaps Santa will get me a panoramic head, though then I have to use a tripod which isn't always easy in a town centre. There weren't many stitching errors to fix - just those two lamp-posts had parallax problems which were fairly easy to fix by hand blending layers. I use Smartblend with Hugin, which I find does a miraculous job at choosing where to make a hidden seam between the frames.

I've uploaded another different view: File:Paisley Abbey from the west.jpg. Only 64 MP but 180 degree view and a Panini projection that worked really well imo. I may nominate that one, but have some gargoyles to accompany it that I want to upload first -- one of which is an Alien. And I have yet more views from the opposite side, but need to work on them first. -- Colin (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Newborn of Lesser short-nosed fruit bat.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2013 at 15:57:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Anton_17 - uploaded by Anton_17 - nominated by Anton_17 -- ~Anton~ (talk) 15:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ~Anton~ (talk) 15:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 10:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aww... Cute! And informative, thanks to the finger. Kleuske (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Quite unique Óðinn (talk) 16:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Umm... probably everybody knows the size of this without the note of 1 inch... Laitche (talk) 17:12, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 21:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support How adorable! My usual Flickr comment. J Kadavoor J e e 04:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:30, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:09, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:42, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Morchella esculenta - DE - TH - 2013-05-01 - 01.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2013 at 13:02:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Morchella esculenta - DE - TH - 2013-05-01- nominated by User:TOMMES-WIKI -- TOMMES-WIKI (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- TOMMES-WIKI (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I prefer this composition if without the foreground leaves. Anyway better than existing FP, in details. J Kadavoor J e e 14:28, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:US Capitol and Grant Memorial.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2013 at 10:29:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice, but WB could be more yellow, shadows could be brighter, and saturation could be tweaked up a bit IMO. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:44, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Too much hidden by the trees. Do you have a western front view? JKadavoor Jee 15:52, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment You're right as far as the Capitol building itself is concerned. Not so much, however, when it comes to the Grant Memorial ;-) Still, I do have other views of the western front, like this image or that. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - So Support :) J Kadavoor J e e 03:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support darkweasel94 21:30, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 07:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A little step left, please...--Jebulon (talk) 08:41, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Hmm, I'm not totally sure what you mean... The image should be centered already (according to the position of the Capitol's spire). --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:A scene from chickee in Keitaku-en.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 21:46:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by Laitche (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Laitche (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please explain a bit better what I am seeing here. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Laitche (talk) 05:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a Japanese garden scene through a window from the Keitaku-en chickee. There are four window panes and window was opened so there was no window glass on the center part but two each window glasses both sides, and the window panes are very old then a bit distorted. --Laitche (talk) 05:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ~~And if you have to be asked to explain what it is we're looking at and why we should care, it's not doing its job.~~ Plus I don't see much that's truly striking about the image composition. Daniel Case (talk) 04:59, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~I partially agree with Daniel so I withdraw my nomination --Laitche (talk) 05:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)~~--Laitche (talk) 15:16, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks all of you, okay I unwithdraw please continue voting :) --Laitche (talk) 15:16, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent composition and beautiful picture overall. The simplicity is stunning and the picture demonstrates very well what the visitor of that garden would see. So, for me it's quite obvious why we should care :-) And Daniel, please take into account that in other parts of the world, norms and expectations around feedback are different. Your comment comes across as very harsh. Thanks, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 12:08, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the harshness of my comment but I'm still not changing my !vote. See below. Daniel Case (talk) 03:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Daniel. I really appreciate it. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ per Frank. I like the simplicity of the composition. --Kadellar (talk) 12:20, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I like both but I'll support the alternative. --Kadellar (talk) 10:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Latiche, please unwithdraw. Tomer T (talk) 12:41, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- I find this very compelling piece of work and my question was just to confirm these are indeed windows to an actual garden. Amazing really. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --Joydeep _Talk 17:56, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a very big wow to me, and a lot of space that's black only and has no information. darkweasel94 21:32, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What I really should have said. Daniel Case (talk) 03:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Negative space and natural framing are other kinds of interesting compositions in photography. --Kadellar (talk) 12:27, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Though I'd be tempted to crop out the top line and hide the vertical line in the bottom, to simplify the composition. Colin (talk) 21:36, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Fixed the lens distortion and cropped, if former version is better I will revert. The vertical line in the bottom is a part of detail (Light to shine through the gap.) so it can't be removed. --Laitche (talk) 04:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Reminds me File:Vista desde la torre de observación, Parque Estatal Brown County, Indiana, Estados Unidos, 2012-10-14, DD 07.jpg; but wins my heart, this time. :) J Kadavoor J e e 05:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC) See alt.[reply]
Oppose Big wow for me, great composition, but there are small clipped bits all over the place and it is just generally overexposed. The underexposure is perfectly fine, it's part of the composition, but the overexposure isn't imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree the garden is over-exposed and if the raw is available I would suggest experimenting with locally reducing it there. One counter-argument might be that if one's eyes are adjusted to the dark room, then the outside will appear over-bright, though only for a short while till they adjust. Colin (talk) 08:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment Julian. I know it and that's why I hesitated to nominate this, I don't want to partially adjust to this photo so if this one is not featured then I would like to take it again in the same composition in cloudy day or winter season. --Laitche (talk) 14:24, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be absolutely perfect and you can be certain of my support then. Although I don't see any problem in partial adjustments here, I respect that approach. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:42, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I uploaded another version and nominated alternative, you maybe like it. --Laitche (talk) 22:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Reverted crop. (Distortion is fixed) --Laitche (talk) 20:12, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info Another version, the overexposure is better than the first nomination. --Laitche (talk) 14:32, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 22:19, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Either, but this is better. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:46, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like both. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:27, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:31, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Prefer this. J Kadavoor J e e 04:13, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support You know what? Now I see what you were looking at. I'd still crop a bit from the top and bottom, but it looks a lot better this way. Daniel Case (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- （＾＾） Laitche (talk) 15:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Prefer this. -- Colin (talk) 09:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poc o² 18:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

The chosen alternative is: File:A Japanese garden scene from a chickee in Keitaku-en.jpg

File:Öördi raba.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 18:10:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Öördi bog, Soomaa National Park, South-Estonia. All by Ivar (talk) 18:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 18:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Stas1995 (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:36, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:20, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:56, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was leaning to oppose, but the fact that this is in Estonia, where I wouldn't expect such scenes to be very common given the climate, the wow factor is there. darkweasel94 21:33, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not really seeing anything to make me go wow - just a lake through trees on a nice sunny day. Boring centred composition, no clear subject. Colin (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- As per Colin + dull colours.Fotoriety (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 12:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support It's not excellent detail and sharp but I like this mood. --Laitche (talk) 18:58, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow, boring centered composition. A stitched panorama will be better for this area. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but per Alchemist-hp.--Jebulon (talk) 08:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Certainly a nice and valuable image. Sorry, but there is nothing really exciting to see. Agree with other opposers. --Cayambe (talk) 10:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Alchemist, sorry --Böhringer (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support per Darkweasel. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:22, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Iifar, I'm sorry but I agree with other opposers. I don't like how centered composition looks here. I'd show more sky and less ground. --Kadellar (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Linz, Hauptplatz.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 17:19:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by darkweasel94 - uploaded by darkweasel94 - nominated by darkweasel94 -- darkweasel94 17:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- darkweasel94 17:19, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 05:06, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although I'd prefer reduced highlights. But nonetheless I really like the scenery. --A.Savin 17:57, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but I don't see the "wow" factor in this. Maybe earlier in the morning would have been better as far as lighting is concerned. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:22, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Feels desaturated to me and the dark areas are very bright (lacking contrast). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:09, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:OrbisSaloduripagorumI.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 19:23:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stained Glass Plate shewing Arms of Solothurn.

Info scanned, uploaded and nominated by User:Abderitestatos -- Abderitestatos (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as uploader. -- Abderitestatos (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't know if it can be a problem of scanning or not, but there's red CA. See, for example, the bottom of the right column. --Kadellar (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good colors, high quality scan. Iagocasabiell (talk) 13:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hunyuan Xuankong Si 2013.08.30 09-02-11.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 14:53:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info The Hanging Temple, in Hunyuan, Shanxi, China. Created, uploaded & nominated by myself. -- Zhangzhugang (talk) 14:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Zhangzhugang (talk) 14:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Despite the tourists... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 19:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Getting rid of the tourists is probably asking too much... Kleuske (talk) 00:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting. J Kadavoor J e e 08:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Needs perspective correction (see right side, it is leaning in) and some more sharpness, both correctible. I'd support if correction is done. Poc o² 08:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Datong Yungang Shiku 2013.08.29 14-41-32.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 14:48:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Yungang Grottoes，World Heritage Site，in Datong, Shanxi, China. Created, uploaded & nominated by myself. -- Zhangzhugang (talk) 14:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Zhangzhugang (talk) 14:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:52, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad lights. J Kadavoor J e e 09:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blériot XI Thulin A Mikael Carlson OTT 2013 08.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 14:23:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me, — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:23, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot. --Laitche (talk) 14:41, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the motion-blur of the background suggesting speed. Well done! Kleuske (talk) 00:14, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Reduced the wing highlight brightness (was almost clipped), as suggested by Kadellar (thanks). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for reworking! Great panning shot. --Kadellar (talk) 15:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice but desperately calls for some lead room rather than a centered composition. Too many images are promoted here despite their violation of this simple but important aesthetic principle. Gidip (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is more space ahead of the aircraft than behind it and the pilot is horizontally positioned around the golden ratio. Vertically, I don't see a good opportunity for an alternative composition. What I tried to do is find a balance between good composition and an aircraft that doesn't disappear in the frame. I agree that a different solution could also work, so I tried to give an alternative below, using an off-center composition and a wider aspect ratio to still keep the empty space at an acceptable level. I'll happily take advice on how to further improve on this. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with Gidip, but IMO a crop on the left is enough, see note Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info Off-center composition and a wider aspect ratio. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. I wish I was that good at panning ;-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:17, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better!!! And the wider aspect ratio further strengthens the feeling of movement. Gidip (talk) 13:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Prefer this version. --Laitche (talk) 17:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support both are good, this one is better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great images.--ArildV (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot.-Godot13 (talk) 03:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice Poc o² 08:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Tobolsk Kremlin panorama1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 12:59:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info: all by me -- Óðinn (talk) 12:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The compsosition is really good, but I would suggest to brighten the image a bit (especially the sky). --Tuxyso (talk) 13:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Óðinn (talk) 03:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - much better but oversharpened imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manastir Visoki Dečani (Манастир Високи Дечани) - by Pudelek..jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 12:33:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 12:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 12:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Diablo Lake (Washington State).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 09:49:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by -- Bob Collowân (talk) 09:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowân (talk) 09:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 13:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Lighting and composition for this scene really do it no favours - very flat and plain.Fotoriety (talk) 00:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Your opinion is appreciated, though I completely disagree with you. -- Bob Collowân (talk) 13:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just ask you to ask yourself; does it really have the wow of a FP, or is it rather dull?Fotoriety (talk) 00:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support. Lighting's fine IMO. I'd prefer to see a bit more further down, but I think composition is good enough for FP. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see no problems with the lighting or composition. Details are nice, too. Daniel Case (talk) 14:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:29, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Puck of Pook's Hill, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 03:29:25 (UTC)

Frontispiece: They saw a small, brown ... pointy-eared person ... step quietly into the Ring
Weland's Sword: Then he made a sword
Young Men at the Manor: 'At this she cried that I was a Norman thief'
Young Men at the Manor: Said he, 'I have it all from the child here'
Young Men at the Manor: 'Sir Richard, will it please you enter your Great Hall?'
The Knights of the Joyous Venture: 'And we two tumbled aboard the Dane'
The Knights of the Joyous Venture: Thorkild had given back before his Devil, till the bowmen on the ship could shoot it all full of arrows
The Knights of the Joyous Venture: 'So we called no more'
Old Men at Pevensey: 'A' God's Name write her free, before she deafens me!'
Old Men at Pevensey: He drew his dagger on Jehan, who threw him down the stairway
A Centurion of the Thirtieth: 'You put the bullet into that loop'
On the Great Wall: 'And that is the Wall!'
The Winged Hats: 'Hail, Caesar!'
The Winged Hats: 'We dealt with them thoroughly through a long day'
The Winged Hats: 'The Wall must be won at a price'
The Winged Hats: Where they had suffered most, there they charged in most hotly
Hal o' the Draft: 'I reckon you'll find her middlin' heavy,' he says
'Dymchurch Flit': 'I know what sort o' man you be,' old Hobden grunted, groping for the potatoes
The Treasure and the Law: Doors shut, candles lit
The Treasure and the Law: 'They drove me across the drawbridge'

Info created by H. R. Millar - uploaded, restored, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent quality. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:51, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 16:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great set! Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 22:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:29, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Puma face.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 19:56:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Bas Lammers - uploaded by Flickr upload bot - nominated by Raykyogrou0 -- Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 19:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 19:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I miss some sharpness, at least in the eye. --Kadellar (talk) 12:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kadellar. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 20:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp. –Makele-90 (talk) 15:09, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meriones unguiculatus - Wilhelma.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 10:37:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Arrangement by the mice; created, uploaded and nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 10:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 10:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 07:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bob Collowân (talk) 09:19, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Extremely cute, but the image is not very sharp. darkweasel94 12:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support So cute （>_<） This got me. --Laitche (talk) 20:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 21:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful! --Uberprutser (talk) 22:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 09:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Beckov castle - panorama (by Pudelek).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 09:33:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Glossy Ibis.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 06:28:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Вых Пыхманн - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 06:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 06:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice job but unfortunately I think the crop on the right (and to a lesser extent the top) is too tight. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 16:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bathyacmaea secunda-en.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 06:28:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by KDS444 - uploaded by KDS444 - nominated by KDS444 -- KDS444 (talk) 06:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- KDS444 (talk) 06:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support High quality diagram. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:37, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fantastic diagram. Support - assuming it's both correct and not a copyvio derivative work (haven't got time to check those aspects right now). --99of9 (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Am actually flattered that you might think it could be a copyvio! I've been working on it for a few months now, interpolating the 3D image from a series of 2D renderings in an academic journal (which I reference in the "Source" section of the image description). Am glad you like! KDS444 (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, I expect it's actually better than the sources. I'm glad you acknowledged, but even acknowledgement and 3d from 2d doesn't necessarily get you out of potentially being an artistic derivative. But as I said, I haven't had time to compare it to the sources yet. --99of9 (talk) 21:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is amazing. Outstanding quality! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:09, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really a great work! Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 22:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:28, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Free artistic 3D interpretation of 2D drawings. Also not usable on dark backgrounds. B.p. 18:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:27, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Skansbergets fornborg September 2013 08.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 05:25:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

ä

Info Ruins of Skansbergets fornborg, a hill fort from the late iron age, at Adelsö outside Stockholm. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice compo and lighting. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(<sall>talk/files</smal>) 07:57, 25 Septem ber 2013 (UTC)

~~Oppose~~ IQ is high photo with contra-light situation is nice, but I cannot recognize a main motive. The compositon does also not really work for me. No Wow, sorry. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

wow is subjective, but I dont understand lack of main motive, the main object is the ruins of the iron age fort. Imo the wow is the combination of the historic fort, the beutiful evening light, and trees. Regards --ArildV (talk) 10:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your reply. Yep, wow is subjective. What is wrong with it? To be honest: Without your clarification I had never seen a ruin on the photo (probably I must look tomorrow again). The line of all different stones are the ruin? --Tuxyso (talk) 17:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Neutral I've overseen your first info post... If there is really something historical relevant on the photo I will not oppose. That photo itself nonetheless does not work for me. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - - Yep, wow is subjective. What is wrong with it? I never said it was wrong! I only explained why I comment about your comment about lack of main motiv (but not about not lack of wow).
      - If there is really something historical relevant Read the file description "This is a picture of an archaeological site or a monument in Sweden" and part of WLM, and remains of fortifications from the Iron Age is normally considered to be "historical relevant". The stones are part of the wall, and to be a fortress from the Iron Age in Scandinavia, well preserved. There is also a historically important region, and the fortress is located a few kilometers from Birka and Hovgården World Heritage Site.--ArildV (talk) 20:52, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Please keep cool and friendly. It is my personal opinion. Although you are upset about it: Without your additional information I see no main motive (mea culpa). --Tuxyso (talk) 21:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I have answered you correctly: you have no reason to ask me to be calm and friendly, and the claim that I'm upset is not true! --ArildV (talk) 21:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Sorry everyone, some misunderstanding which we sorted out.--ArildV (talk) 21:53, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very wow IMO -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose -- Poor & inappropriate lighting, unspectacular composition.Fotoriety (talk) 05:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --JLPC (talk) 10:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose unfavorable lightning: simply too dark for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose With the right lighting this could have a chance. But, as noted above, it's too dark. Plus the sun through the trees creates some blown areas. Daniel Case (talk) 14:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Unfavorable light conditions. --Vamps (talk) 10:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Door knocker in Goslar, Lower Saxony, Germany.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2013 at 00:27:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed: Dark and bright halos around the main subject, noise. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:56, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very nice and accurate composition. There might be halos (I have no view for that). There might also be some color noise but it is imho neglectable. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agree with Julian the halos are quite noticeable. Too much "clarity" or equivalent local-tone-mapping tweak? But if fixed I would support as I like the composition. Colin (talk) 11:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info I opened the NEF version (RAW). Notice: There is dust on the door knocker. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This new one looks like it has way too much noise reduction -- very plastic looking and less tonal variation. Plus, the original was in sRGB and the new one AdobeRGB which shouldn't be used for Web/Commons. -- Colin (talk) 11:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:National park moor Mecklenbruch in the Solling, Lower Saxony, Germany.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2013 at 16:04:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 16:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 16:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blown and near-blown sky at upper left. Daniel Case (talk) 05:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice composition, but per Daniel Case. Also, the shadows seem to have a magenta tint (might be correct but I can't imagine what would cause that), and some banding in the sky (as a direct result of what Daniel mentioned). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:00, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Michael Gäbler (talk) 16:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Savona IT, Hafenpanorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2013 at 22:11:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Savona IT, Hafenpanorama c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 22:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 22:11, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some perspective distortion, should be easily correctable. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree. If you use Hugin, set some vertical control points on the sides of buildings and it will fix things for you. Colin (talk) 11:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - oh, das ist sehr nett von dir. Danke --Böhringer (talk) 17:06, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 10:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bryce Amphitheater from Sunrise Point Highres 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2013 at 20:48:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info 140 Mpx panorama of Bryce Canyon Amphitheater photographed from the Sunrise Point
created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support WOW!!! Sehr gut. Schön anzusehen, toll. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:35, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 21:48, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:31, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not happy with the lights. J Kadavoor J e e 03:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC) Support after a rethought. J Kadavoor J e e 06:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Óðinn (talk) 04:20, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 05:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 07:49, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Wow, amazing. Clearly needs ccw rotation though. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the info. It's difficult to see. It would be helpful if you draw an alignment line with the note tool. A slight rotation should be easily fixable. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I agree that it's difficult to see, so I don't think it has to be absolutely precise. It's just relatively far off right now. Two points of reference that work: a) The hills in the left top background should be close to horizontal. b) The trees should, in average, be vertical (which is relatively difficult to measure). I think the first one should be sufficient for a good enough alignment. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done I've slightly rotated the image. Please take another look. IMHO it is better now. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Definitely better, thanks. Enough for Support. I added a note of what I think would be ideal, maybe someone can give a second opinion on it. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Thanks for your effort and info. Further correction would probably lead to problems. The two people at the bottom left could be rotate out of the image. I would like to keep it as it is. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:23, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I fully understand, I think that's ok. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Brackenheim (talk) 10:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Julian there's some rotation. I don't envy you stitching this without anything to place a vertical control point on -- I find without them sometimes Hugin can let things wander a bit as it tries to align frames (though the Straighten Horizon tool sometimes works a miracle). But overall, this doesn't detract much and there is so much detail to see. Colin (talk) 11:51, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:56, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:33, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all for the great support! --Tuxyso (talk) 07:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Kunstkamera SPB 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2013 at 20:23:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Florstein - uploaded by Florstein - nominated by ahura -- PERSIA♠ 20:23, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PERSIA♠ 20:23, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Because we already have this one, which is sharper, bigger and more impressive and also by Florstein. --Kadellar (talk) 23:19, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. J Kadavoor J e e 03:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Attica 06-13 Sounion 20 Temple of Poseidon.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2013 at 17:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by A.Savin 17:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 17:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:16, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Prefer this view. J Kadavoor J e e 03:57, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Why portrait format? Nothing in the foreground I'd want to see. Not sure about Jkadavoor's choice as the wide angle is very extreme, but File:Grece 033.JPG suggest that the steps could be a feature to lead the eye. It is QI but the composition isn't FP. Colin (talk) 11:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition does work for me. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 10:14, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Portrait works for me here ... I've taken similar photos of colonnaded ruins, and you don't know what's on either side that would ruin the image. My eye is drawn to the colonnade, not the fencing and stones below. Daniel Case (talk) 14:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:24, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:2013-09-14 11-40-10-Collegiale Saint-Thiebaut de Thann-PA00085696.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2013 at 16:05:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LOOKS GORGEOUS. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! -- SamX‧☎‧✎ 15:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 20:49, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd like to think this is what the doors of perception would look like once they are cleansed. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 07:49, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Or this? JKadavoor Jee 07:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I noticed it, it's also a good one, but I think they can be both featured. Tomer T (talk) 09:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm sorry, but I find the crops (left, above and right) too tight.--Jebulon (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Kostel sv. Víta v Libědicích.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2013 at 15:40:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Church of Saint Vitus, Libědice, Czech Republic. Created and uploaded by Pavel Kinšt, nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am not a fan of church FPs (we have already that much) but imho this one is really nice. It is always a pleasure for photographing if the weather evokes such dramatic lighting and the photographer is able to catch that light.. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a great light situation, and well used with the composition. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 16:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 16:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Though the creator appears to have embedded a calibration profile for his own monitor, rather than use a standard such as the recommended sRGB, so this might not display properly in many browsers or image tools. Colin (talk) 17:43, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I couldn't nominate it yet ;) --Kadellar (talk) 11:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 16:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:02, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 00:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Levi Morton - Brady-Handy portrait - standard crop.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2013 at 01:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Mathew B. Brady or Levin C. Handy - uploaded, restored, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:41, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good portrait. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:RepublicanRiver1947.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2013 at 01:24:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flooding along the Republican River, 1947

Info created by J.G. Connor - uploaded by Urdangaray - nominated by Ks0stm -- Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 01:24, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 01:24, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition a little messy (bottom crop chops through features). Detail on the people (a bit of a focal point) is insufficient for FP IMO. --99of9 (talk) 03:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Newborn chickens.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 22:37:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Uberprutser - uploaded by Uberprutser - nominated by Uberprutser -- Uberprutser (talk) 22:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Panoramic Overview from Glacier Point over Yosemite Valley 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2013 at 20:18:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info High resolution (136 Mpx) panoramic overview over Yosemite Valley photographed vom Glacier Point
created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great work. --Laitche (talk) 20:32, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- mit welcher Software hast du das zusammengebaut? --Böhringer (talk) 20:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Mit Hugin 2012.0. Ging völlig unproblematisch, außer dass es auf meinem Laptop mangels Speicher nicht klappte. Zu Hause mit 16 GB RAM und schnellem Prozessor völlig unproblematisch. Das mehrzeilige Panorama besteht aus 63 Einzelbildern. English: I used Hugin 2012.0 as Software. 63 single images in multiple raws where stichted without serious problems on a 16 GB RAM computer with a i5 2550K processor. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! darkweasel94 21:36, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 21:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Very poor lighting (lack of shadows on mountains) gives this scene a lack of dimension. Composition unspectacular.Fotoriety (talk) 00:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but I cannot really follow your arguments. Your formulation "Very poor lightning" does imho not carefully considering the photo. BTW: There are some shadows (look at the Half Dome). The main motive here is the overall Yosemite formation (moutains + valley). Light at midday is not "very bad" because the complete valley AND the montains are lightened without extreme shadows. My main purpose here was do to a very detailed documentary image of the valley and surronding mountains and for that case midday is for me the better time of day than the more atmospheric light in the morning or in the evening. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:42, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Diliff has created some lovely pictures of this with sunset lighting (File:Glacier Point at Sunset, Yosemite NP, CA, US - Diliff.jpg and File:Half Dome from Glacier Point, Yosemite NP - Diliff.jpg). However those capture a different area (though still have the Half Dome and there are some nice waterfalls to the right of the Half Dome that would have been good to include). Our purpose on this project is educational material, not to create postcards or panoramic posters to sell from the tourist shop. While lovely lighting and picture-postcard images are fantastic to have and rightly featured, we should also support those attempting to provide "detailed documentary images" (as Tuxyso puts it) where the lighting supports detailed study rather than being merely attractive. The Internet is full of "downsized for web" highly processed picture-postcard images with watermarks and restrictions that look fantastic but don't have great educational use because you can't study any details and you can't republish them for free.

However, I'm reluctant to support for now because I think the image is significantly titled in the area of the Half Dome and below. Compare Diliff's pictures. The trees are a giveaway. I think it is important for such geologically interesting formations, to get it straighter than this. Colin (talk) 09:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your detailled assesment. What do the others think about the perspective? Visually I see no significant tilt. But for sure it was aligned but Hugin and you have no real verticals here for orientation. If there a really perspective problems I guess I have to manually influence the stitching process. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I took a crop of the right-hand side and opened it in Irfanview. Then took Diliff's Half Dome picture and reduced it 80% in size. Yours and his can then be aligned up to be surprisingly similar apart from the lighting. Yours is a little fatter horizontally, but that's to be expected from projection changes. Using the selection rubber-band rectangle tool, I drew a vertical from the pointed tip of the Half Dome down the a light patch in the rocks far below. Then rotated yours -4.5 degrees to get it the same. The mountain range on the far right still doesn't come up as high as Diliff's, requiring another degree perhaps, but then the dome is rotated too far. Another comparison is looking at the craggy peak to the left of the dome compared to the distant range to the right. In Diliff's these are almost level, whereas in yours the right is far below. However, to show how hard this is, I can compare Diliff's half dome with his wider pano. To do this, reduce the half dome by 45% instead. You will then see his wider pano is significantly tilted anti-clockwise , making the right hand mountain range much higher than the left.

Overall your pano does show the right hand mountain range curving downwards where perhaps it should be closer level with the left. A 4.5 degree tilt is quite a lot, assuming Diliff's half dome is correct. Colin (talk)

~~Support~~ Very nice. I disagree about the poor lighting statement. When viewed at full size, the walls have nice texture and relief, and there are walls in many different directions, so it's difficult to have a perfect hour to frame it all, probably not so difficult for a "detail" shot, e.g. the Dome only. I'm not sure about the scale (how high the walls are would be very useful in the description) but there must be some climbers in it, I couldn't find any, they must be two or three pixels. --Kadellar (talk) 12:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You are right. I have seen them with field glasses and also made a short video sequence where you can see them moving.
  @Colin: I am unsure about the right perspective. Later I will nominate an alternative with a manually modified projection where I tried to adress your comments. But the stitiching is very time intensive. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Both are very good but I'll support only the alternative, ok? --Kadellar (talk) 12:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~{{s}}~~ Very nice and very good IMO--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 23:46, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Both are very good but I'll support the alternative--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 16:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info I've created a completely new stitch (slightly wider at the left) and manually corrected perspective according to other non-stitched photos of the same place - thanks Colin for your precise description of your point. Imho perspective is now better especially arround the remarkable Half Dome. Please take another look and support if possible. BTW: Hugin was very balky - it took serveral attempts to get a complete run without hang-up :(
Support --Tuxyso (talk) 21:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yeah, hugin tends to be balky all the time when I use it. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 21:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this one better, the original felt it was missing a little bit. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:31, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is an unsharp area on the right of the both images, see note on the first --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:42, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Yes, you're right. Very small and on the very edge. Nonetheless I've uploaded a new version an just cropped it out. If you like take another look and support if possible. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:02, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support It's OK --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:44, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Spectacular. --Laitche (talk) 09:18, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:02, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gidip (talk) 14:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The earth is flat again :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:22, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 08:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support also good. darkweasel94 11:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 16:23, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 16:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 09:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 01:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Israel-2013-Aerial-Mount of Olives.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 21:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, and nominated by -- Godot13 (talk) 21:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Because this was taken at sunset from a helicopter, the ISO is high, creating noise in some of the shadowed areas (e.g., trees). Fixing this specific noise is beyond my technical skills... While not impossible, this would be a difficult image to recapture -Godot13 (talk) 21:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Godot13 (talk) 21:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 23:15, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:59, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful golden hour lighting. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 07:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it needs a little counter-clockwise rotation though, judging from the buildings. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:42, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I used the towers and taller buildings for vertical alignment and checked it against other building edges. Could you indicate where it might be off? Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 17:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's probably alright, sorry for the misleading comment. I don't know how I looked at that earlier. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 20:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Godot13 (talk) 21:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support J Kadavoor J e e 06:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 08:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 09:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Renoir, Pierre-Auguste, by Dornac, BNF Gallica.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 19:27:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Dornac - uploaded and restored by Jebulon - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great photograph of the famous painter Pierre-Auguste Renoir, and good restoration. -- Tomer T (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 20:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for surprising nomination. It is a very rare picture indeed, with a good definition and decent size.--Jebulon (talk) 23:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:41, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 06:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 07:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Myrabella (talk) 09:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 12:05, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Vespa orientalis 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 12:48:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 12:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gidip (talk) 12:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 14:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 16:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support lovely. --99of9 (talk) 03:32, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent work. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 08:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 09:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Vila Viçosa September 2013-25a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2013 at 18:10:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info For my 2000th upload to Commons I wanted something a little better. This is the best of a long series of panoramas that I made of a gorgeous place: the Ducal Palace of Vila Viçosa, in Portugal. The equestrian statue represents James, the 4th Duke of Bragança. - Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please see the notes. --Ivar (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you Ivar, some errors were corrected. But those irregularities in the third and fifth top windows are really there (I checked other photos). Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:08, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:44, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:07, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jebulon (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 09:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Gidip (talk) 09:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Petronas Panorama II.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2013 at 17:07:47

Info This image is overexposed, tilted and suffers from distorted perspective. Needless to say, it also doesn't look all that realistic as a photograph. (Original nomination)
Delist -- russavia (talk) 17:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Agree. I'm kind of surprised this got FP at all. Colin (talk) 19:16, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this image "was" a FP in the past ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:21, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Ivar (talk) 07:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist , but I don't fully understand what's going on on the file page. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:46, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a POTY finalist. Tomer T (talk) 10:33, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That says a lot about POTY. Colin (talk) 11:54, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Nice view but I don't think it would pass a nomination now. --Kadellar (talk) 12:23, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is a pity that we can't find an alternative for this so far. De-listing will not make any difference unless we find one. :( J Kadavoor J e e 13:29, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is this good? J Kadavoor J e e 13:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is much good either. Blown sky and sloping verticals. This is Commons, not Wikipedia. They can illustrate the article with an over-processed HDR image if they want. There are lots of buildings where we are glad even to have only "satisfactory" images, never mind FP. Someone should send Diliff to Malaysia for a holiday :-) Colin (talk) 14:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They really don't want it; it seems no better choice available. J Kadavoor J e e 14:38, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "they" I was referring to was the article editors, who have had that picture in the article for years. I'm glad it didn't make en:FP. Colin (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 5 delist, 2 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. JKadavoor Jee 06:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Faro, Plaza Zdrojowy, Sopot, Polonia, 2013-05-22, DD 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2013 at 22:29:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Lighthouse and garden at the Zdrojowy Square, Sopot, Poland. All by me, Poc o² 22:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 22:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good but IMO it need a little perspective correction, the right and the left are leaning in (see notes) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done Agree with you, that correction was needed, thanks! Poc o² 18:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is it an HDR or a single shot? Commented by Tuxyso Poc o² 18:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Single shot, as usual, when I propose my first HDR -if I do so- I will let you all know about the premiere, Poc o² 18:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've asked you again and again and have again forgotten it :) Such photos from single shots are unusual for me because my camera has not such a dynamic range. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 23:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The uneven surface of the clouds and the degree to which some of them are blown is very distracting (Not that this couldn't be an FP in clearer weather with the sun somewhere else). Daniel Case (talk) 06:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if you mean "bright" when saying "blown", I agree, but they are not overexposed. And, yes, as Christian says, that's Poland, a nice country with tricky weather (seen as Spaniard) :) Poc o² 08:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a distracting surface, much more so than it would be if it were uniformly overcast. We cannot blame the weather for the failings of our photos anymore than Rafael Viñoly can blame the high sun for the death-ray problem at 20 Fenchurch Street. Daniel Case (talk) 06:01, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support The sky cannot be blue all the time, especially in Poland, a good photographer also take photos when the weather is bad -- Christian Ferrer Talk 07:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose After certain considations I am not fully convinced of this photo. My question if this is an HDR aroused because it looks as if you've photographed against the light. The consequence is that the sky is quite bright and, as Daniel stated, somehow distracting. All buildings are in unfortunate shadow. This photo could have been better at a different time of the day. BTW: Please add geocoordinates. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poc o² 19:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Frontignan, Hérault 04.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 06:09:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:08, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:08, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Christian, I'm sorry but I don't see any wow in this landscape. Besides, due to the long distance to the villages, there's a lot of distortion caused by air (unsharpness, not perspective distortion), windows and edges of buildings look slightly curved. --Kadellar (talk) 12:06, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. With all those horizontal lines cut off, the image is missing context. It would need to be wide enough to show the whole shore, if that's interesting enough. As it is it's the sort of image you see all over Flickr. Daniel Case (talk) 14:21, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, you're right, in my big despair, this day, I had forgotten the hood of this lens and I could not put the wide angle, but however I like this image. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:39, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fremantle Fishing Boat Harbour gnangarra 5291.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 09:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Gnangarra - uploaded by Gnangarra - self nominated by Gnangarra -- Gnan garra 09:46, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gnan garra 09:46, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but many white parts of the boats are totally blown out. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 11:04, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose + unfavorable crop. On top too low, below too much place. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kool-Aid Lake.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 15:28:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by felipecancino on Flickr - uploaded by SamX - nominated by SamX -- SamX‧☎‧✎ 15:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator and uploader, but not photographer. -- SamX‧☎‧✎ 15:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination withdrawn. SamX‧☎‧✎ 14:19, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Lovely composition and nice view, but sadly unsharp with many artifacts. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --Vamps (talk) 10:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Quito Panecillo shopping.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 17:32:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Cayambe -- Cayambe (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info El Panecillo is a touristic place in Quito, Ecuador, where artisans, mainly from Otavalo, sell there handicraft. Please, consider that there is FOP in Ecuador.
Support -- Cayambe (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No compositional wow, and frankly very cluttered. Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paisley Abbey from the west - crop.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 17:50:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Colin - uploaded by Colin - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support High resolution, well lit and thirteen gargoyles -- one of which is an Alien. -- Colin (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better lights than the north west view. Love to see the south west view too. (Here the third dimension of the slopped roof is missing; not a big issue though.) J Kadavoor J e e 06:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm working on one from the south-east (which isn't as good as this), I don't have a south-west. The Abbey is more than just the main church building -- as a former monastery, the adjacent buildings, court and cloisters are all significant components, which are visible from this angle. I think the markings on the pavement of Abbey Close form nice leading lines towards the subject, and this angle suits a Panini projection (diagonal lines from a central perspective point). -- Colin (talk) 09:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:11, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's just good, but not outstanding. Composition from north-west side is imo much better. Light conditions at this one are not the best, because sun was directly behind the photographer and that makes image flat (almost no shadows at the abbey). --Vamps (talk) 10:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can't please everyone it seems. -- Colin (talk) 12:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think it would look better with more crop on the right side. There isn't really much to see on that side, and the main subject on this version is much further left than at the "rule of thirds" division. darkweasel94 10:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the right is the the Anchor Mills building, a Grade A Listed building and important to Paisley's history. So I'd like to keep it. The subject is the entire Abbey complex, including St Mirrin's chapel and the Palace of Paisley, the memorial cross in the courtyard and the cloisters round it. The main tower is actually to the right of the "rule of thirds", should one care about such regulations. The symmetrical leading lines point towards the courtyard of the Abbey -- a symmetry that would be lost if the right is cropped. Colin (talk) 12:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Crop is good like that --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:13, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 20:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Wat Pho, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 12.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 18:48:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Reclining Buddha statue in the homonymous temple, Wat Pho, Bangkok, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 18:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 18:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I know you are trying to avoid an ugly sign at the base, but the effect is you are looking at the ceiling and the image is dominated by the pattern at the foot. So the reclining Buddha doesn't get much attention. Trying to get it all in with a wide angle just distorts the room and the size of the ... are they toes?. Perhaps better to concentrate on part like File:Wat Pho Large.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks, I see your point. No, no ugly sign but 40 heads and yes, those are the toes! :) What do you think about this version? Poc o² 21:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Poc o² 21:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Upper Antelope Canyon Heart Formation 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2013 at 23:33:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 23:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support just because I like this heart-picture very much... -- Jebulon (talk) 23:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Oh, thank you very much for the nomination. Currently I have two other FPCs running and had nominated a photo from the Antelope Canyon later. For those who do not know this beautiful place let me provide a few background information. The canyon is run by Navajo Indians and is only reachable via a guided tour (no other possibility to get there) which goes about 20 minutes Off-Road street and tooks in the canyon abour 30-45 minutes. The canyon itself with the nice formations is VERY narrow. Visitor groups have very limited time to go through the Canyon like a driven herd of sheep and have 20-30 sec at every photo stop. The canyon is photographically challenging because it is 1. quite dark (4 secs at ISO100, f9) and 2. you have extreme differences in brightness. 3. the time is very limited. Light from above comes through tiny clefts and producues very bright spots. Even this very nice FP has remarkable overexposed areas. HDR does help in some cases but not in every case. The nomination here is a single shot. --Tuxyso (talk) 00:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Somehow strange to write a review for an own image, but I've not nominated it - so why not: I had wished slightly more space at the left side - the heart is tightly cutted there. The tiny overexposed spot (very right, near the middle) is imho not disturbing and inevitable in this Canyon. Noneless FP-worthy because the form comes out well (was shown to the group by a female Navajo Indian) and the quality of the photo is very high compared to other photos of the Canyon on Commons. --Tuxyso (talk) 01:28, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interesting; but wish a wider composition. J Kadavoor J e e 06:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 19:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 14:02, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support And seven ;-) !!! Keep up the good work.  Richard  [®]  19:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:San Francisco from Pier 7 September 2013 panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 06:43:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light and composition. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Beautiful. Would personally prefer a slightly tighter lower crop. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:44, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral In comparison to the alternative. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 19:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like it. Wrt Julian's comment, I wouldn't remove any sky. There's a few patches of moire (see notes) that Lightroom should be able to deal with its brush (not sure if Photoshop has the same tool) -- Colin (talk) 13:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I wanted to suggest removing some water, not sky. Sorry if that wasn't clear. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Moire reduced. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Composition should remain as it is - looks very balanced to me. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 16:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ but I completely agree with Julian about the lower crop. --Kadellar (talk) 12:39, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll support the alternative only. --Kadellar (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Switching support to Alt --Godot13 (talk) 12:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alt[edit]

Info Due to popular request I have uploaded a version with a tighter vertical crop. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:56, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:56, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks, better imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 19:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support even better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 19:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support any. J Kadavoor J e e 07:26, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Godot13 (talk) 22:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 08:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support So I do.  Richard  [®]  19:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

The chosen alternative is: File:San Francisco from Pier 7 September 2013 panorama edit.jpg

File:Orchis militaris - Hall käpp.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 07:48:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ivar Leidus - uploaded by Ivar Leidus - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 16:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The inflorescence is full of internal shadows that give a very unattractive shot. Either photograph the side illuminated by the sun, or better - use a fill flash or completely artificial illumination. Sorry but orchids deserve better. Gidip (talk) 12:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Gidip. This is a good QI, but illumination and background make the image feel restless/unsettled (was searching for a better word without success). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:George Vince's Cross.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 11:02:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info George Vince's Cross, Antarctica. Created and uploaded by Sergey Tarasenko - nominated by Kadellar (talk) 11:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very interesting picture of WLM from Antarctica. -- Kadellar (talk) 11:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could do with a 0.4 degree tilt anticlockwise. -- Colin (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 06:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Godot13 (talk) 12:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Nikhil (talk) 16:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support There's WLM Antarctica?!? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes --Jebulon (talk) 12:24, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Myrabella (talk) 09:41, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 14:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support When I think of Antarctica I think of exactly this, good quality and composition, FP! Poc o² 08:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice composition  Richard  [®]  19:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:41, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

Image:Libelle 2013-09-05.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 11:14:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by NowakHamburg - uploaded by NowakHamburg - nominated by NowakHamburg -- NowakHamburg (talk) 11:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- NowakHamburg (talk) 11:14, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The area closest to the camera is overexposed and a lot of important detail is lost through noise removal (and possibly compression). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Atelopus zeteki1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 12:29:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Brian Gratwicke - uploaded by Amphibianrescue - nominated by Nikhil
Support -- Nikhil (talk) 12:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much is out of focus, unfortunately. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tram interior edit1.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 19:31:50

Info below 2 megapixels (Original nomination)
Delist -- darkweasel94 19:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- it was and still is an awesome picture - small or not! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:40, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Above 2 MP is a new criteria; not applicable for old FPs. BTW, the original file is above 2 MP. JKadavoor Jee 07:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- FPs should always be the best of the best - if something wouldn't pass FPC today it seems legitimate to nominate it for delisting. In addition to the reason I provided, I also don't see the big wow factor, but that may be because I've been regularly travelling with that tram type for all my life. darkweasel94 09:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not against your delist request. Just pointed that we can't delist all previous FPs below 2MP (the only reason you gave for the request) or with GFDL only license. We can delist if the overall quality is disappointing, though. (I took time to find the source file in this case which is not transferred to Commons so far. Another example how careless we are on the licensing matters.) J Kadavoor J e e 10:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a picture taken in 2002, uploaded 2005, so we'd make allowances perhaps even if nominated now. But Jkadavoor is right that we don't delist simply because of size or licence changes to the FP criteria. This is a wonderful picture and I'd take one of these over 10,000 QI train photos. Colin (talk) 11:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jkadavoor and Colin. ■ MMXX ^talk 16:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 10 years from now we will be saying this is a treasure. Besides, no way am I de-listing a child that cute. Saffron Blaze (talk) 00:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 13:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no reason to delist. It is the overall statement of the image which makes it to an FPC. Only size (< 2MP) should never be a reason to delist an FP (instead in cases where details are necessary, e.g. with panorama shots or complex architecture shots). --Tuxyso (talk) 09:08, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per others. --Laitche (talk) 16:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Still a great (and really nice) picture! Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 19:06, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A wonderful image, its essence unaffected by its resolution. Acroterion (talk) 03:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --JLPC (talk) 08:37, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nce, no reason for delist. --Karelj (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Michael Barera (talk) 01:45, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is outstanding  Richard  [®]

 19:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep 2MPx margin is irrelevant for older FP's. --Mile (talk) 13:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 2 delist, 14 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. JKadavoor Jee 07:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Imperia (Ligurien) mit Porto Maurizio und Oneglia rechts.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2013 at 21:38:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Imperia (Ligurien) mit Porto Maurizio und Oneglia c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition, tack-sharp. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd expected it to be "tack-sharp" considering it is reduced 50%. It is a useful panorama but I'm not convinced about the composition. I think I'd prefer a shot from the end of the pier of the more distant town. -- Colin (talk) 12:08, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the view of the whole bay. Colin, your idea of composition is very nice but it would be a completely different picture (as I understood your comment). --Kadellar (talk) 12:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 11:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 14:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice  Richard  [®]  19:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Silica Sand.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 03:47:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Bellus Delphina - uploaded by Bellus Delphina - nominated by Bellus Delphina -- Bellus Delphina (talk) 03:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bellus Delphina (talk) 03:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is not very good at showing the sand despite it appearing to be the main subject. The plant is cut off on top. Clipped blue and white in the sky (overexposure). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Julian. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 13:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With Julian. Before FPC it is always a good idea no nominate the image at QIC in order to see if there are quality issues. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:28, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others, compositional issues and badly blown sky. Daniel Case (talk) 23:58, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:House Boat DSW.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 04:05:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Bellus Delphima - uploaded by Mydreamsparrow - nominated by Bellus Delphina -- Bellus Delphina (talk) 04:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bellus Delphina (talk) 04:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Uploaded a color balanced version. Sting (talk) 15:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Even if reduced in the edited version, the sky is polarized with green and magenta banding due to bad shooting settings or harsh post-processing in the original file. Quality bellow FPC standards. Composition has nothing special either imo. Sting (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Denver Art Museum built 1971.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 18:36:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by SHOSHIE8 - uploaded by SHOSHIE8 - nominated by SHOSHIE8 -- Shoshie8 (talk) 18:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Shoshie8 (talk) 18:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it is overexposed and unsharp.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:41, 2 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Môle Saint Louis Lighthouse, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2013 at 09:50:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:49, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:49, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Not sure about the composition - I feel the lighthouse is chopped off at an awkward place, and its positioning relative to the background houses and ship are a bit uncomfortable. Nice detail and lighting though. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:18, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done You're right, there was an imbalance in the composition, I've tried a new crop, I think it's better now, anyway thanks -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:56, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Crop again, better centring IMO -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I like the current crop with the extra space on the left. Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:44, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Just wandering: why didn't you just take a centered front-view of the scene? To plain? Lack of interesting base highlight colour?Fotoriety (talk) 01:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly your question (I'm not sure about that), you ask me why I did not take a front view of the lighthouse =

1/ Because of the sun light, with this centring the sun is in my back (with the front view the left half of the lighthouse is in a dark area) so why I did not come back at a different hour, because I wanted a photo with this particular light and also see answer 2.

2/ Because I wanted to include the entire boat in backgroud at right

3/ Because I wanted to compose with the writing plaque

I hope my ansers are good -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:10, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --JLPC (talk) 08:30, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment New version less satured, IMO better -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:39, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition, nothing special. --Karelj (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, the quality is top but the composition doesn't work for me, the cut is to hard. I think though that there is potential for FP with a different composition. I'd make a picture of the whole lighthouse, like you did here but closer and laying on the floor to try to avoid disturbing elements in the background (houses) and stressing the nice floor. Poc o² 09:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Yes, you're right, I've nominated it for the quality, but the composition is not working. I had come this day there to take exactly the photo which you have just described, but in my great disappointment they put a panel on the left of the lighthouse to announce a construction site and it was impossible to make an attractive photo of the whole lighthouse, then I contented with trying semi-close-ups. I live at a few minutes, I shall return when they will have finished the works. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Catedral de Santiago 28IX2007 8.JPG, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2013 at 11:35:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Iagocasabiell -- Iagocasabiell (talk) 11:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Iagocasabiell (talk) 11:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dark and off-center—really hard to tell not only what we're supposed to be looking at but what we're looking at to begin with. Daniel Case (talk) 00:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel Case, and the image quality (colour noise, detail) is not sufficient for FP imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:09, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination You are right, it's too dark and noisy. Iagocasabiell (talk) 11:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:49, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:4ème manche du championnat suisse de Pony games 2013 - 25082013 - Laconnex 53 - 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2013 at 06:00:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 06:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pleclown (talk) 06:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose QI but no wow. Background is distracting. Colin (talk) 11:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jonny Wilkinson - US Oyonnax - Rugby club toulonnais, 28th September 2013 (3).jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2013 at 11:50:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Inisheer - uploaded by Inisheer - nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 11:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pleclown (talk) 11:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately the advertising hording is very noisy as is the fan banner behind. Also a tighter closer image of Wilkinson would work better. Flickrworker (talk) 16:40, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think a (near) square crop with an off-center subject (right) will be better. J Kadavoor J e e 06:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination I don't have time for improvments right now. I will maybe try again later. Pleclown (talk) 10:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Escultura en Muxía Fin do Camiño 13VII2013.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2013 at 14:53:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Iagocasabiell -- Iagocasabiell (talk) 14:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Iagocasabiell (talk) 14:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:58, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

image:Catedral de la Almudena - 130826 211731.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2013 at 16:32:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Barcex - uploaded by Pedro J Pacheco - nominated by Pedro J Pacheco -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think I made a mistake in the proccess. The file appears as an Image. Apologizes, I hope somebody can teach me to fix it. I strongly hope this mistake will not affect to the possible votes to the image. -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 16:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice but it is slightly tilted. The facade is not vertical now. --Kadellar (talk) 19:18, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment per Kadellar: A little cw rotation and this is really good. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 21:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for considering my picture as a FP candidate. I will try to fix the issues that some of you have pointed out. Barcex (talk) 07:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tip: Note that nearly three days have passed, and probably four by the time you upload the new version. Since most votes occur in the first day or two, I fear this might not get enough votes, so if I were you I'd withdraw this and renominate it as soon as you're done editing to get the benefit of the full 9-day voting period. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Following the advice of King of ♥ ♦ ♣ Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 14:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark).JPG, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2013 at 15:36:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by -- Bob Collowan (talk) 15:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowan (talk) 15:36, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great interplay of colors and nice composition (especially the framing by the tree and its leafs) --Tuxyso (talk) 15:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice composition, a little bit of purple CA in the foliage --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add a note, please? I'm not sure where you mean. Thanks, --Bob Collowan (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sorry, I think it's a bit oversaturated. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination – due to the problems mentioned above. Perhaps I'd nominate a new version when I have solved them. -- Bob Collowan (talk) 20:13, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there is not much ca, it's not easy to see (I have add notes) and IMO it's not necessary to withdraw for that --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:41, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Virginia State Capitol late morning.JPG, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 07:47:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very good image, but some part are a bit overexposed. And the main façade and the bulding on the left are too much in shadows, a photo at the end of afternoon would be better a lot IMO -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:14, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Star Ferry's Harbour Tour 12.JPG, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 08:33:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded & nominated by KTC -- KTC (talk) 08:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- KTC (talk) 08:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Unfortunately, I think the framing might be just too tight. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Really a nice centring but the boat attract my glance and it's disturbing -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The boat being there is what I like about it.... Oh well. KTC (talk) 18:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sadly, too many layers without any perspective/compositional/lighting separation. Also some blue haze, which would be correctable. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 16:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination KTC (talk) 18:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Panorama du château de Fontainebleau, 2010.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 21:36:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Alain (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 21:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are stitching issues with the sky above the chimneys in the centre. Also fence rail at very bottom right may have a stitching alignment problem (or may just be wonky). There is too much of the trees on the left and the trees on the right are too dark (though the path is nice). I think an already high-contrast scene has had the contrast boosted too much. The potential for reflections in the water is imperfect as much of the water isn't calm. The panorama has been downsized at least 50% resulting in just a 7MP pano and it isn't even that sharp. -- Colin (talk) 22:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support but maybe a bit over sharpened. --Laitche (talk) 02:42, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of flaws, changed my mind. --Laitche (talk) 10:50, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 18:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:GWH Fritillary and Shadow4.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 06:20:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Gwillhickers - uploaded by Gwillhickers - nominated by Gwillhickers -- Gwillhickers (talk) 06:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gwillhickers (talk) 06:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC) Cropped from larger image: Subject (butterfly) of image is very small, does it really need 2mb of pixels to constitute a good picture in such cases? Image can be viewed with excellent detail, sharpness and clarity. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 07:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: under 2 MP resolution.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lion Yerevan zoo park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2013 at 05:18:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

good job. --ERJANIK (talk) 07:03, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: subject is obscured, unsharp.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 8 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bleriot XI OTT 2013 D7N9432 001.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 09:10:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by Ritchyblack (talk) 09:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ritchyblack (talk) 09:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:30, 8 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Oh, sorry I forgot about. Ritchyblack (talk) 09:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Telleri kabel.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 08:19:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Amadvr - nominated by Kruusamägi -- Kruusamägi (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very engaging picture; it has a unique quality that we don't see much on FPC. The blown-out sky is forgivable given that it's shot under the trees. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 22:10, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice compo. --Laitche (talk) 04:05, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great atmosphere Poc o² 08:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition and exposure. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice colours, but can we have an English description please? --Kadellar (talk) 08:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Ivar (talk) 15:07, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 11:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Czech-2013-Prague-Astronomical clock face.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 06:27:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Godot13 - uploaded by Godot13 - nominated by Pine -- Pine^✉ 06:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pine^✉ 06:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Though can the shadows be lifted a little perhaps? -- Colin (talk) 11:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice and eye-catching. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:29, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 21:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 22:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 04:07, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination.-Godot13 (talk) 22:24, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 08:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting  Richard  [®]  19:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice object, nice capture.--Jebulon (talk) 21:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 11:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Ada Lovelace portrait.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 06:15:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Alfred Edward Chalon - uploaded by SirHenryNorris - nominated by Pine -- Pine^✉ 06:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pine^✉ 06:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Is the skin done with watercolor, too? — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exquisite image of an important historical figure. We don't get too many good watercolor portraits, to boot. Daniel Case (talk) 00:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gobōnobo ⁺ ^c 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 14:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Laitche (talk) 06:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good work  Richard  [®]  19:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 11:08, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:San Francisco City Hall September 2013 panorama 3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 06:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not a lot of contrast in the facade though, might have been reduced through highlight reduction or similar editing. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:38, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high quality, nice light. You took the photo at the right time. Suggestion for minor improvement: I would reduce the brightness and/or saturation of the green traffic lights. Those are very bright compared to the darker enivornment and distract from the main motive. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:35, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support but halos around the ~~top of~~ poles and flags. --Laitche (talk) 04:25, 2 October 2013 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 03:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, tending to oppose. Nice and spectacular, beautiful place, good capture, good symmetry, king size, excellent sharpness. But I find the light not so good (I disagree with Tuxyso), because it makes the monument a bit "flat", with some lack of contrast. The trees are really too dark, and the foreground could maybe be cropped a bit. Well, I remain neutral.--Jebulon (talk) 21:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 11:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Templo Phra Si Sanphet, Ayutthaya, Tailandia, 2013-08-23, DD 17.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 22:02:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Buddhist monks in the Phra Si Sanphet temple in Ayyuthaya, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 22:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 22:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice -- Christian Ferrer ^TALK 2:25, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Support Dust spot is on the ~~right~~ left side of the central tower. --Laitche (talk) 04:00, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Dust spots and Request Please add a geolocation tag to this image's info page if possible. Thank you.. --217.159.158.132 12:31, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Slightly prefer this. J Kadavoor J e e 17:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dust spots removed and geodata added Poc o² 18:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support beautiful and atmospheric --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't like the crop on the right, would like to see more there, but it's very good as it is. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 13:58, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 06:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 12:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Crater Lake winter pano2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2013 at 04:09:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by WolfmanSF - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 04:09, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 04:09, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gorgeous view. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:30, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great capture! I am not sure, but probably it has a slight CCW tilt. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Iagocasabiell (talk) 11:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. --Laitche (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 13:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 18:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support (Cartman voice): Sweeet!. Daniel Case (talk) 21:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice.-Godot13 (talk) 03:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the best lighting but overall FP to me Poc o² 09:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 16:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support—Love, Kelvinsong talk 17:29, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  19:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 09:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:01 Calanche Piana.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2013 at 09:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 09:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, the narrow and winding road running through the Calanques of Piano in Southern Corsica bears heavy traffic in summer, but here, there is only a person admiring this amazing site, giving the human scale furthermore. --Myrabella (talk) 09:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Myrabella (talk) 09:20, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like it, but feel that shadows are too dark. Maybe reduce the contrast? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:05, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thank you for your interest. Mediterranean light is harsh and produces strong contrasts; however I have lightened the shadows as suggested. New version uploaded.--Myrabella (talk) 10:47, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice and the person give the scale -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:46, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 06:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Christian Ferrer. Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 21:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice  Richard  [®]  19:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great detail ... the person was not visible until I opened it up. Daniel Case (talk) 05:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jebulon (talk) 16:20, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:54, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Puerta de Alcalá - 04.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2013 at 12:35:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Puerta de Alcalá at night, Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 13:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is IMHO room to increase sharpness but FP level to me anyhow for composition and execution Poc o² 09:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you all for your support. I was expecting some more participation here! --Kadellar (talk) 15:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:54, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haapsalu piiskopiliinnuse müür, vaade põhjast.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 08:19:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Amadvr - nominated by Kruusamägi -- Kruusamägi (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The building has a strange, dark and blurry edge towards the sky. There also seems to be quite a lot of perspective distortion judging from the lamps. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Uploaded a first edited version (here) with only perspective correction and a second one (here), which is the current one, with additional reduction of sky's saturation and correction of its banding due to over-saturation in the original file. The author may set as current version the one he prefers. Sting (talk) 16:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mlýn v Ruprechtově.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2013 at 18:18:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Windmill Ruprechtov. Created and uploaded by Pavel Kinšt, nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Support Another great image by Pavel Kinšt. -- Ivar (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the composition and the interesting subject. Unfortunately, this image has been overprocessed. I hope the uploader has still access to his RAW-files. It would be great to see a cleaner and lighter version of this scene. Also, noise could be controlled better. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Frank --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:35, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not perfect, but nice. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:51, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. Would be better if there had been direct sunlight hitting the foreground to contrast with the stormy clouds, but still quite good. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The sky has been highlight-recovered too much resulting in false-colours. I'm not sure about the composition, with the windmill pointing out of the picture. Btw, this is another one with the author's monitor calibration profile embedded as the colour profile. Why would anyone do that? -- Colin (talk) 08:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Cleaned up and uploaded new version. --Laitche (talk) 06:24, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sympetrum sanguineum LC0316.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2013 at 17:18:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Ruddy Darter (Sympetrum sanguineum); created, uploaded and nominated by Jörg Hempel
Support -- LC-de (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better than existing FP (for me). J Kadavoor J e e 07:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and nice bokeh Poc o² 09:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:49, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:56, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good  Richard  [®]  19:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:41, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Kiev Jew Killings in Ivangorod (1942).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2013 at 19:40:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by anonymous WWII photographer - uploaded by Jarekt, user:Poeticbent and user:Movieevery - nominated by Jarekt -- Jarekt (talk) 19:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jarekt (talk) 19:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giant Shiva Linga, Hampi.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 10:40:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info c/u/n by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 10:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Dey.sandip (talk) 10:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Some parts are overexposed -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thanks for the review. I have re-cropped the image to retain symmetry and avoid the over-exposed portion at the top. The histogram looks good, IMO. Please check the new version uploaded -- Dey.sandip (talk) 17:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the top of the Giant Shiva Linga is also overexposed, it's burned out and you can't see it in the histogram because there is nothing more in this area -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing more in this zone except white light and this light is not considered as overexposed by your software. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is a single-exposure frame and the light is directly falling on the top of it, I am not sure what can be done. Considering this is a very small area of the frame and no interesting details where present there either, I guess, it should not be a bother --Dey.sandip (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, absolutely nothing can be made because the camera registered no detail for this zone. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Should the oppose reason, be reviewed then ? --Dey.sandip (talk) 15:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For me it is already a criterion of not promotion for a QI candidates (specially here because it is the main subject which is affected) then for a featured candidate I keep firmly my opposition. I know that it is frustrating and I really feels sorry. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dancing Girls Bath.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 10:35:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info c/u/n by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 10:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Dey.sandip (talk) 10:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice and appeasing composition -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. An outstanding photo. The sensor seems to have been a little warm, judging from the noise, but I'm guessing that this is hard to avoid in this situation. It's also a little blurry and there seems to be some posterization in the area of the stones on the left bottom. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful light. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -  Richard  [®]  19:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice atmosphere, very harmonic composition. But what's about the color space? Isn't sRGB better for web images? --Tuxyso (talk) 21:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Copsychus malabaricus male - Khao Yai.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 23:25:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 23:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very nice! -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 23:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:15, 9 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

I know that rule, but this isn't my image, look above! :-) -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 11:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the limit is per nominator, not per nominator-creator combo. You can ask on the FPC talk page to make sure. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:14, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, in that case I apologise for the mistake! Greetings, -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 12:58, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forcipiger flavissimus Yellow Longnose Butterflyfish PNG by Nick Hobgood.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 21:47:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Nhobgood - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 21:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 21:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice compo. --Laitche (talk) 04:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 09:56, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice  Richard  [®]  19:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish

File:Sultan Ahmed camii Istanbul 2013 17.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 21:33:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Karelj -- Karelj (talk) 21:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 21:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Prefer this. J Kadavoor J e e 08:58, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's upside down and the sharpness and noise towards the edges, especially on the left, is, in my opinion, not FP-quality. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:17, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:24, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orchis punctulata 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2013 at 16:56:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 16:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gidip (talk) 16:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question I also love this tiny orchids, but why did you crop the top? --Tuxyso (talk) 18:07, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no crop at the top (there is some at the bottom though); this is the way I photographed it. I find the composition appealing. The emphasis here is more on the individual flowers and their arrangement than on the shape of the entire inflorescence. Gidip (talk) 19:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I like the lights and DOF in File:Orchis punctulata 1.jpg; here it seems a bit too warm. JKadavoor Jee 08:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- weak Support I disagree with Jkadavoor: On File:Orchis punctulata 1.jpg I only see harsh flash light, the balance of ambient light and flash light (it is also softer here) is remarkable better in the nomination here. Also the colors are much better here. Although the crop is unusual it draws the attention, as stated by Gidip, on the flowers. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I Agree with Tuxyso. Gidip (talk) 22:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --H. Krisp (talk) 20:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the crop works, but is it possible to reduce the posterization of the blurry background? — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't see a problem, maybe you can pinpoint a specific part of the image that is problematic? Are you sure you are looking at the more recent version I uploaded from Oct first? Gidip (talk) 12:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was looking at the most recent version. I marked a few areas where it's the most obvious, but it's spread relatively evenly across the background. There are many 4x4-pixel-blocks visible. The problem would probably not be noticeable if you would use the full histogram, but the lower 5-7% aren't used. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see it now. It happens to me often in images with dark background. If you can explain how to avoid this I would really appreciate. I didn't really understand what you said about the histogram. Any simple manipulation in Photoshop or CaptureNX to fix this? Thanks. Gidip (talk) 17:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I neither own nor use either of these programs, so that's slightly difficult. Maybe someone else can help. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 20:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Seabourn Quest (ship), Sète, Hérault 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 16:56:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. First thought there was some perspective distortion, but the side of the ship seems to be slightly inwards-leaning. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice. Tomer T (talk) 19:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition. Though maybe just a little water can be cropped away. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You're certainly right but this image have exactly an aspect ratio 16:10, and I will not crop it. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can you fix the slightly ca (purple fringing) and moire? --Laitche (talk) 02:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done If I forgot something, can you add notes please? -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added the notes of moire ~~and still purple CA between top of ship and sky, CA is almost removed~~. --Laitche (talk) 06:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems CA but there wasn't, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 07:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support and per King of Hearts. --Laitche (talk) 07:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but I can't see what you mean with moire and although you've added note I don't see any problem, and so I can't do nothing, maybe I need glasses, thanks anyway. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Can anyone judge about that? Maybe I need a pair of glasses... --Laitche (talk) 07:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please see this one. --Laitche (talk) 09:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, now I see, but I totaly disagree, because :

1/ for the flag, there is a blue part on it, you can see the same flag in this image.

2/ for the boat, it's part of architecture, there is something behind the windows, see this image -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I roughly edited the image, I just wanted to explain about that moire so I'm supporting this image, it's OK :) --Laitche (talk) 10:15, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you very much for you interest, it's really nice -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ivar (talk) 11:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive.--Jebulon (talk) 14:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice  Richard  [®]  19:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:45, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 18:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm really partial to this sort of image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do not want to break the eggs in the basket (in fact, no votes against) but for me there is little depth and is badly cut on the sides.. and some points are very chaotic (that antenna on the tip feels terrible with the windows behind). Before you kill me :P, can I ask why you have muted colors? was more lively in the first version. I like the ship, is Italian have built in Genoa :) --Pava (talk) 02:04, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The colors are much close to reality in the current version, but maybe my first choise (more artistic with much colors) was the best... -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Joshua Tree Park approaching thunderstorm 02 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 01:12:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 01:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 01:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 02:00, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice atmosphere, very dramatic. However, the composition makes me somewhat uneasy, because the foreground rock and the middleground Joshua trees seem to be fighting for attention. I would suggest cropping it to make one or the other more dominant in the image. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO it is OK that they fight for attention (for me the rock in the foreground is much more eye-catching). Both element, giant rocks and Joshua Trees, are characteristic elements of the park. Cropping out the Joshua Tree would destroy the dramatic atmosphere (clouds), cropping out the foreground rock would destroy the central idea of the composition: sun-lightened rock in the foreground vs. dramatic apporaching thunderstorm. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Noise level of the sky (darker parts) could be reduced. --Ivar (talk) 09:42, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks for the hint. Please take another look. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:01, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 12:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 14:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - GReAt  Richard  [®]  19:29, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 20:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 18:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:130823 Cape Kamui Shakotan Hokkaido Japan02s3.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 10:16:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by 663highland - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 10:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. Beautiful, pity about the slight unsharpness. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is a nice scene but I think the camera has focussed nearby. I also like File:130823 Cape Kamui Shakotan Hokkaido Japan06s3.jpg with the meandering path. Colin (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Eleassar ^(t/p) 19:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sky in center background blown. Daniel Case (talk) 00:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice composition, but also unsharp, pity... --Ivar (talk) 18:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 22:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tomer, I think quick withdrawal (before 5 days) is a bit disrespectful to the creators. I agree, you are working hard; and may have a long queue of candidates. J Kadavoor J e e 03:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I will take it to my attention. Tomer T (talk) 10:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Roma-parco degli acquedotti03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 00:51:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Iessi on flicrk - uploaded by Mac9 - nominated by -- Pava (talk) 00:51, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pava (talk) 00:51, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. --J Kadavoor J e e 02:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 01:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Geneva MotorShow 2013 - Alfa-Romeo 4C red front light.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 01:07:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info (this is Already picture quality) description: lights of Alfa Romeo 4C beautiful play of light and high detail of the materials (especially carbon fiber) the photo is also infer the change of sinuous surfaces of the body. created by Pleclown - uploaded by Pleclown - nominated by -- Pava (talk) 01:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pava (talk) 01:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. --J Kadavoor J e e 02:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 01:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tuticorin Thermal Power Station at Night 1 crop.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2013 at 12:16:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by [1] - uploaded by Begoon - nominated by Perumalism -- Perumalism Chat 12:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Perumalism Chat 12:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lights are very noisy. Flickrworker (talk) 16:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:12, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good composition, but unfortunately bad quality. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 01:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough quality, IMHO. Barcex (talk) 13:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paris - Vintage travel gear seller at the marche Dauphine - 5212.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2013 at 17:21:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 17:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:21, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting assortment of objects, but image way too cluttered to easily extract anything. No wow, in other words. Daniel Case (talk) 00:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~{{withdraw}}~~ Tomer T (talk) 03:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great and interesting picture. Why "withdraw"? --Kikos (talk) 08:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Because of Daniel's oppose vote. Sorry, I already opened a new nomination. Tomer T (talk) 09:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then please renominate this image again at a later stage! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I unwithdrew. Tomer T (talk) 12:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak oppose: The idea of the photo is very good and a classic stylistic device in photography: repeated elements. The repeated here are elements are spherical and circular forms. I had vote with support if there had not been such massive distortion at the edges - the elements there are not yet spherical. Also the crop at the bottom, especially at the "PARK" sign looks arbitrarily to me. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Considering the great EV. J Kadavoor J e e 08:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support For originality Poc o² 09:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wicked  Richard  [®]  19:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 07:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 15:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose image unbalanced (inconsistency between horror vacui between too many gaps), excessive reflexes cause overexposure, subject unclear and messy. I do not see much originalitymany favorable comments are without argument, why?--Pava (talk) 01:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 01:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Westerhever Nordostblick.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 18:59:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Lighthouse Westerheversand Warft, Westerhever, Germany, heading Northeast c|u|n by --  Richard  [®]  18:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --  Richard  [®]  18:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, the clouds add a nice layer of dimension. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 19:29, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support da wäre ich jetzt auch gerne --Böhringer (talk) 19:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Da war's ganz unspektakulär ;.)  Richard  [®]  19:42, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ich hätte lieber die Kamera von Richard :) --Tuxyso (talk) 08:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's probably just me, but it looks like image has minor CW tilt. --Ivar (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 21:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LC-de (talk) 08:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 12:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 18:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald (de) 21:45, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Claus (talk) 04:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 08:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nikhil (talk) 15:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 01:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Dannebrog ved Rødvig Strand.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 16:37:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by -- Bob Collowan (talk) 16:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowan (talk) 16:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose does not show the quality, tree trunk cut in half, you could bet on the fabric but the light is too general and captured without special attention --Pava (talk) 01:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Czech-2013-Prague-Vyšehrad cemetery arcade.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 23:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info The Arcade at Vyšehrad cemetery (Prague) created, uploaded, and nominated by Godot13 -- Godot13 (talk) 23:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Godot13 (talk) 23:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ciudad de las ciencias noche.JPG (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2013 at 20:52:20

Info Noisy and unsharp. We have two much better versions which are both FPs. The previous delisting attempt was unanimous but failed due to lack of votes; now that delisting noms are run in the same place as regular noms hopefully we'll get more participation this time around. (Original nomination, Previous delisting nomination)
Delist -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:52, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Christian Ferrer ^TALK 21:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Hemispheric_-_Valencia,_Spain_-_Jan_2007.jpg. J Kadavoor J e e 07:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Kadellar (talk) 16:29, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Tomer T (talk) 16:58, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Michael Barera (talk) 01:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 9 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. JKadavoor Jee 01:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia de San Nicolás, Gdansk, Polonia, 2013-05-20, DD 13.jpg

File:US Capitol west side.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2013 at 08:51:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 16:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A lot of detail and sharpness seems to have been lost. From what it looks like, I'd guess that happened through compression, but the file is very large for how strongly coompressed it looks. Apart from that, I'm not fully convinced by how foliage and grass look desaturated and cold. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:34, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Hmm, as far as the general sharpness of the image is concerned: I guess that's due to the ultra wide angle I had to use. You cannot expect miracles from 17mm on a ff camera. And as for the "desaturation". I don't know, and actually I don't think it's that bad. Maybe it's a side effect of my polarizer... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:45, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, this definitely looks more like lens edge unsharpness than artefacts. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - At the edges, maybe. But in the center, the grass has no detail at all. Unsharpness doesn't kill detail, it just makes it a little less sharp. But the photo is clearly sharp in these areas. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - OK, I see it now. Martin, did you shoot in RAW? How much NR did you use? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Yes, I shot in raw, but I didn't use much NR at all. Could it be that the dark pattern in the grass I suppose you're talking about had been created by lawnmowing - cf soccer fields etc. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info new version! More saturation, even less NR --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The colors are better now, so I think it's supportable, but the detail hasn't changed imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 17:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:56, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  19:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Walt Disney Concert Hall Partial View sw 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2013 at 06:56:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Partial view of Walt Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles in black/white
created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:56, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support great --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:54, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition, no wow. --Karelj (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What had you done better? Where do you see room for improvement?
  My idea here was to do a very minimalistic composition. I've added a grid of third to clarify the alignment of elements. For me the most interesting aspect of this image is the gradient of brightness triggered by the fine curvature of the different elements of the building. The black/white version accentuates this and draws attention to the very structure of the hall. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 21:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I like the composition! -- Wolf im Wald (de) 13:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice composition  Richard  [®]  19:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Karelj. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I understand the oppositions, but it works for me.--Jebulon (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 07:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it Barcex (talk) 16:52, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Catedral de la Asuncion Cupula principal.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2013 at 14:43:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. — Pedro J Pacheco Pedro J Pacheco -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author — Pedro J Pacheco talk -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good. I like the composition as well as the mood. For my liking the level of noise is a bit too much and should/could be removed.  Richard  [®]  10:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OpposePer Richard Bartz. But I'm afraid the noise level is way too important.--Jebulon (talk) 08:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:02, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Luminale 2012 - OVO innen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2013 at 20:51:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (de) 20:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info The photo was taken from inside this illuminated structure during the lightning-festival Luminale 2012 in Frankfurt, Germany.
Support -- Wolf im Wald (de) 20:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tuxyso (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought at first it was the plot of some algorithm. Neat. Daniel Case (talk) 05:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The Wow is there ! PierreSelim (talk) 06:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 08:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice.  Richard  [®]  10:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought this was already featured. --Kadellar (talk) 11:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice color and composition, impressive. --Laitche (talk) 16:47, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barcex (talk) 18:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 19:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Eleassar ^(t/p) 19:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 15:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Fokker DR1 D-EFTJ OTT2013 D7N9181 BEA 002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 08:54:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ritchyblack (talk) 08:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ritchyblack (talk) 08:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 09:40, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great. He has done a magnificent job.  Richard  [®]  10:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "He" ? Who, "He" ? He ? :)--Jebulon (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Bwah! of course not Manfred. :-)  Richard  [®]  15:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice panning. --Kadellar (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:55, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great panning technique and composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow.--Jebulon (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:46, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 05:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support This Fokker's great! Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice motive, you captured a good moment here. Question As we all can see you produce airplane shots of VERY high quality. For me (and I guess for some others too) it would be interesting to hear something about your shooting technique. How complex is your post-processing? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here (talk) can read all of my answer :-) --Ritchyblack (talk) 14:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The translation of the answer of Ritchyblack from my talk page:
My missing English language skills are the reason why I do not vote for other photos here. Notably for negative votes an in detail justification is very important for further discussion. Positive statements for photos without any explanatory comment seem to be also odd to other users. To the core of your question: On flight shows and car races I photograph with a monopod and ball head. I use the Sigma 50-500 lens with image stabilizer never at open apperture of f5.6/6.3 but at a minimum of f8. On my D700 I prefer higher ISO values instead of open apperture shots. The optimum shutter speed for propeller-driven aircrafts is from my experience between 1/125sec to 1/350sec to preserve the movement of the propeller on the photo. I always expose in manual mode with activated Auto ISO function for compensation of varying brightness. The apperture is oriented to the bright areas on the photo. For exposure measurement I use the spot or integral method to get a rough value for the contrast ratio of the scene. Very often I still use a light meter and other photographers smile at me for that. Compared to the other (smiling) photographers I do not look permantely on the camera display for checking the correct exposure of my photos. I shoot in Nikon RAW format (NEF) import the photos in Lightroom and convert them to the manufacturer-independent Adobe DNG format. The development of the RAW files is done in Lightroom for 98% of my photos. Very important is switch on the lens correction profiles especially for the Sigma lens mentioned above to eliminate its strong vignetting. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ritchy and Tuxyso for the info. Ritchy; you can vote and express your opinion in German, if you prefer so. This is a multi-lingual, multi-cultural project and "we" have to compromise in many areas. My native language is Malayalam and I think not a single person here in FPC know it.

J Kadavoor J e e 11:47, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed; especially if the nominator/creator is also German. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cute multicultural discussion, let's keep it up like this. That makes Commons so special. To Ritchyblack: Bitte kommentiere und bewerte auf Deutsch! Deine Bilder lassen uns ahnen wie wichtig uns deine Kommentare wären. Also gib dir 'nen Ruck! -- Arcalino (talk) 21:42, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:09, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Boeing E75 OTT2013 D7N9597 BEA 005.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 08:41:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Ritchyblack (talk) 08:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ritchyblack (talk) 08:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 08:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great too. --Kadellar (talk) 11:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support If this is real panning as it seems, you deserve a gold medal. Barcex (talk) 18:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Also outstanding.  Richard  [®]  21:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 09:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Gelbstieliger Nitrathelmling Mycena renati.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 20:28:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- -- H. Krisp (talk) 20:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author -- H. Krisp (talk) 20:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 02:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benreis (talk) 10:09, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 13:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LC-de (talk) 05:10, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely  Richard  [®]  08:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Citron (talk) 21:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Mehdi^Talk 04:55, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 08:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi

File:Pach Brothers - George Foster Peabody.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2013 at 11:13:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Pach Brothers - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  19:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:46, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Solid restoration. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support after reading the article. J Kadavoor J e e 10:32, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 17:09, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Stefan Heym (1982).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2013 at 23:51:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Marcel Antonisse - uploaded by Jan Arkesteijn - nominated by Jan Arkesteijn -- Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 23:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 23:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  19:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 01:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice portrait. Can we have an English description please? --Kadellar (talk) 11:20, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:30, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:32, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Syrbula admirabilis.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 21:23:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ks0stm - uploaded by Ks0stm - nominated by Ks0stm -- Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 21:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 21:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too many distracting elements IMO. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:17, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King of Hearts. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 14:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per the others. The wiper bases and vents are not only distractions, they eliminate any wow we could have gotten from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 00:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- as above Arcalino (talk) 06:38, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maikel Melero - Exhibición Freestyle GP Camión de España 2013 - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 11:09:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Freestyle rider Maikel Melero at an exhibition during the Spain Truck GP 2013 ("Rock Solid" trick). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 11:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 11:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:01, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hot Shit!  Richard  [®]  13:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support As just above. Not far from perfection, I may say. POTY ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thank you for your words. I'm so happy with all this support, I can't imagine a POTY, that sounds so far for me now! Merci beaucoup Jebulon! (and thank you all for the support too). --Kadellar (talk) 15:38, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Air wonderful! --Laitche (talk) 16:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better as [my photo] Ritchyblack (talk) 17:03, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 18:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Eleassar ^(t/p) 19:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Pile-on Support Wow. Such detail ... see the dried mud on the underside of the seat and the URL on the chain guard. Daniel Case (talk) 00:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support great pic Nikhil (talk) 15:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo, perfect crop. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:47, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 17:20, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 21:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not only saucers can fly! Great details, one can see the pilot's eye; I like that the scene is not totally frozen: the move of the wheels give a dynamic effect. --Myrabella (talk) 07:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you all for your support! --Kadellar (talk) 11:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks Carlos, for your wonderful contribution(s). J Kadavoor J e e 11:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:D --Kadellar (talk) 12:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Mortagne S Gironde 17 Musée 2009.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 10:57:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by JLPC - uploaded by JLPC - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting. J Kadavoor J e e 16:59, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely and peaceful. Charentais.--Jebulon (talk) 23:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Details like the museum sign or the "Entrée" pictogram make it really charming. --Myrabella (talk) 07:15, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a very nice postcard for this Local museum of postcards! -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 19:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good one. --Laitche (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Thanks to Christian for the nomination and to voters. --JLPC (talk) 09:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Blue Wildebeest-001.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 15:00:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Leo za1 - uploaded by Leo za1 - nominated by Nikhil
Support -- Nikhil (talk) 15:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cropped too close on the top. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Szent István-bazilika - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 16:35:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Interior of the cupola of the St. Stephen's Basilica, Budapest, Hungary. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 16:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 16:35, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm actually quite surprised at what this compact can do at ISO 800. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! Daniel Case (talk) 02:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support as KoH -- Arcalino (talk) 06:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:07, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some blue CA to be corrected, below every window.--Jebulon (talk) 21:20, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Fixed now. --Kadellar (talk) 15:35, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 08:52, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support perfect correction, thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 23:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:50, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 09:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 10:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you all for your support. --Kadellar (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Die Süntelbuchenallee in Bad Nenndorf.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2013 at 14:14:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:14, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:14, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The blackpoint is very high (the darkest colour in the image is very far away from black). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 20:15, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thank you, I made a better update. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the black point just got even higher, and everything has a green cast. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've just calibrated my monitor a few minutes ago. And yes, this photo has a strong green cast which is imho not surprising here. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thank you, I made a new update. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Image is getting worse with every update. --Ivar (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 08:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mono Lake Old Marina August 2013 006.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2013 at 07:57:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question What happended to the seagulls heads? Blurred because of personal rights? :-)  Richard  [®]  20:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Long exposure. I think I'm able to shop them out, though; do you think that would be a good idea? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Personally I think that a long exposure is useful for subjects totally imobiles or for subjects which show a regular and continuous movement (river, car traffic inthe night...). Here the atmosphere is really pleasant but the heads of the birds are a problem IMO. You would had to frighten them before taking the photo or not opted for a long exposure. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure but I think long exposure is generally not appropriate to photograph animals Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination I will try again with a photo that doesn't have so many birds. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 06:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Samadhi Mandir of Srila Prabhupada, Mayapur 07102013.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2013 at 19:39:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Samadhi Mandir of Srila Prabhupada at ISKCON, Mayapur, West Bengal, India. Created/ uploaded/ nominated by Joydeep _Talk 19:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Joydeep _Talk 19:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~weak oppose~~ Neutral: The composition is good, but light and detail quality does imho not reach the FP bar. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've worked on the image and reprocessed it from original. --Joydeep _Talk 19:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Better than the previous version, I see visible improvements. But I am still not fully concinced of the overall image. Nonetheless I've changed by vote to neutral. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:14, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --JLPC (talk) 15:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 08:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boeing PT-17 Kaydet A75N1 D-EQXL OTT 2013 03.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2013 at 12:16:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:16, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:16, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:00, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 08:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice colors.  Richard  [®]  10:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not so impressive as the pannings but very nice too (also per Richard). --Kadellar (talk) 11:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good enough Barcex (talk) 18:40, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 00:39, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:34, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:39, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Rummu karjäär1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 19:48:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Rummu quarry, all by Ivar (talk) 19:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 19:48, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice, but I think the bottom is cropped a little too tight. Could you possibly provide a little more room at the bottom? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:18, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Also good imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I prefer this version. With a wider bottom crop there is imho too much shadow. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 08:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Tuxyso. --Kadellar (talk) 11:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 15:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this one -- Arcalino (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I vote for both — Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info Alternative with different focal length. --Ivar (talk) 08:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:14, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

The chosen alternative is: File:Rummu karjäär1.jpg

File:Kapelle Stofel bei der Alpe Oberdamüls 11.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 19:27:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Kapelle Stofel bei der Alpe Oberdamüls c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 19:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 19:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 21:21, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Neptuul (talk) 11:29, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, for me this doesn't have a lot of "wow" factor. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Can we have an English description too, please? --Kadellar (talk) 16:25, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Böhringer (talk) 21:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support to me its a "wow" because the weather and the colors. --Ralf Roleček 10:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support World record with the most annual snowfall --> wow. J Kadavoor J e e 15:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:God the Father and angels, Pietro Perugino, Stanza dell'Incendio di Borgo, medalion, part of the ceiling, Vatican City 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2013 at 14:04:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Pietro Perugino - photographed, uploaded and by nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 14:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support "God the Father and Angels", by Il Perugino, one of the medallions of the ceiling of the "Stanza dell'Incendio di Borgo", Vatican City.-- Jebulon (talk) 14:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support but even better with a smidge crop on the right --A.Savin 17:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:01, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Copsychus malabaricus male - Khao Yai.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2013 at 10:36:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by User:PierreSelim -- PierreSelim (talk) 10:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm taking the nomination for this marvelous bird -- PierreSelim (talk) 10:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; but doing it within 24 hours (by simply replacing the original nominator with your name) will reduce our work load. The bot seems down. :) J Kadavoor J e e 11:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I did not realized by then that the bot was down. :( --PierreSelim (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hope Daniel can fix it soon. J Kadavoor J e e 12:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support John Harrison has definetely an advantage in competition due to his hardware :) Nonetheless this shot is very good and should be featured. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It isn't a competition :-) According to Wikipedia, there are 10,000 living species of bird. So plenty variety of subject. Colin (talk) 17:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barcex (talk) 17:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. Colin (talk) 17:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. --Laitche (talk) 18:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent work – very sharp, good color rendition, nice bokeh, pleasing composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent --Rjcastillo (talk) 01:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 21:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 08:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 10:46, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:25, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:" 11 - rear tail light detail on Alfa Romeo 4C Concept.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 01:48:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info practically perfect detail and acquisition and display. That small scratch on the rear dome light makes you realize how the rest of the image is perfect. The quality is high (Alfa Romeo 4C). created by Supermac1961 on Flickr - uploaded by Pava - nominated by -- Pava (talk) 01:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pava (talk) 01:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not very sharp, quite noisy, I think a better composition is possible. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:22, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ParcodegliAcquedottiRoma (3).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 00:57:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Notafly - uploaded by Notafly - nominated by-- Pava (talk) 00:57, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pava (talk) 00:57, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unfavorable composition, the foreground bothers me -- Arcalino (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Arcalino. Daniel Case (talk) 18:20, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Warsaw 07-13 img29 View from Palace of Culture and Science.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 08:19:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by A.Savin 08:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 08:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 08:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer 10:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically well-done, definitely a QI; but the washed-out sky, unexceptional cityscape and jarringly asymmetric large building with crane on the left keep it from FP for me (Also feels a little overprocessed ... maybe slightly overexposed?) Daniel Case (talk) 01:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 08:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice colors, and very good centring with this symmetry between the two buildings and the roads at left and right. And also the central road is like an axis witch guide the look from the central fountain to the rest of the town. For me it's an excellent image. --Christian Ferrer 16:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:26, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 14:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Jacob Appelbaum-IMG 9320.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 05:18:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Jacob Appelbaum at the Congress on Privacy & Surveillance (CoPS213) at the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
created by Rama - uploaded by Rama - nominated by Rama -- Rama (talk) 05:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author — Rama (talk) 05:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support interesting and well-done portrait. Tomer T (talk) 10:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting portrait but the light is too weak and therefore it is a bit noisy, and maybe a bit unsharp too because of the dim light and the high ISO used. --Kadellar (talk) 11:15, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kadellar. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice portrait. --Ralf Roleček 10:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 06:59, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lincoln Memorial east side.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2013 at 04:16:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:16, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good but underexposed IMO. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info New version! Exposure problem Done - imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:06, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 13:56, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support The left is leaning a little in, but good IMO -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:31, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Mercedes-Benz IAA 2013.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2013 at 20:59:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (de) 20:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald (de) 20:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose What is the subject of this picture? All is black and red.--Claus (talk) 04:40, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image shows the light effects and the rush at exhibiton hall of Mercedes-Benz at IAA 2013 in Frankfurt and this featured image also shows only two colors. ;-) -- Wolf im Wald (de) 19:54, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support To me, the subject is the architecture of this hall. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 12:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And what can you tell us about that architecture based on this photo alone? Daniel Case (talk) 04:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can see the rough layout of this area of the hall, I see how light and colour is used for a dramatic presentation of the cars, I see how the visitors have access to an area all around the presentation area, going up via the escalator on the right and then back down using slopes (which is very similar to the Mercedes-Benz museum in a way). I also see that the roof is built in the shape of a dome but not lit at all to give the impressin of a very high room, making it almost but not completely invisible. On the right, an LED screen is used to imitate the look of a draped red curtain (thanks to sufficient resolution to see individual pixels). All parts of the building itself are clearly deconstructivist in their architecture. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:50, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what I see is an abstraction of discordant shapes in red and black into which the Daimler-Benz logo has somehow wandered. It is artistic, perhaps, but not an effective picture for an encyclopedic article. Daniel Case (talk) 06:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Interesting colors and lighting, well-captured, but they cannot obscure the fact that this image lacks a clear subject. Daniel Case (talk) 00:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Excessive overexposure of light, dark parts too vague and illegible, photography is badly cut (the subject is indefinite, it seems that the photographer did not know quite what to photograph)--Pava (talk) 01:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose looks like a nightmare in red -- Arcalino (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:47, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whistlejacket by George Stubbs edit.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2013 at 02:43:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by George Stubbs - uploaded by Crisco 1492 - nominated by Nikhil
Support -- Nikhil (talk) 02:43, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Araneus diadematus (Clerck, 1757).JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 19:44:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 04:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Female? (big + no big Pedipalps) J Kadavoor J e e 16:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 19:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Lone Cypress 17-Mile Drive 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 17:45:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 17:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ralf Roleček 10:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I also like the image :) --Tuxyso (talk) 20:56, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 22:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 09:18, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 14:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little bit of distortion in the lower left corner but nowhere near enough to ruin the image overall. Daniel Case (talk) 18:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've visited this place earlier this year and I wish I had gotten a shot as good as this ;-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good composition, it's a pity that the quality is not a bit better --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:44, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- @Christian: Could you clarify what you mean by "quality"? If you mean resolution: My general impression is that we (nominators and reviewers) are a bit spoiled with high resolution images from modern sensors and stitching techniques. The photo at hand has a resolution of 7,3 megapixel (crop from a 16 MP photo) and is for the standard use-case more than sufficient. I see a certain danger that photographers with "average cameras" (the 16 MP sensor from my D7000 is not that bad) are deterred by such comments and are worried about nominating own images of FPC. IMHO the detail quality of the image here is not bad, you still see fine details on the green bushes. The background with the coastline is a bit foggy but this gives the image an interesting mood. -Tuxyso (talk) 11:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - You are right, I did not enough explain. The details of foregroud and in the backgroud are good enough and the fog is not a problem (for me it's an information for the weather of this place, and in more of to be valuable it " gives the image an interesting mood"). But I find the image so beautiful that it would have been exceptionel with more fines details on trees at left, on the rock at center and on the water just behind. So it is a pity that the quality is not a bit better. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 11:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 16:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 18:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Grand Canyon Powell Point Evening Light 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 07:55:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Grand Canyon from Powell Point in evening light
created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice contrast. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good framing; but it seems far away objects on left are washed out in the lights compared to File:Grand Canyon Powell Point Evening Light 02 2013.jpg. JKadavoor Jee 12:17, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I cannot really see your point. You are right that the light in both shots is slightly different (the nomination is a bit brighter especially at the left). The nominated photo is photographed about a minute later, light changed very rapidly at this day. If you compare the sharpness of the area at the left my impression is that sharpness is better on the nomination and the shadows show more details. The brighter left mountains which you describe as "washed out" add imho a special mood to the photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes; I compared both in 1:1 and the "sharpness of the area at the left" is better here. But I don't like the "brighter left mountains"; but, of course, people have different tastes. :) J Kadavoor J e e 12:46, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I also prefer 02, mainly because it has more atmosphere due to showing more of the dark clouds, though both are very good. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the alternative -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 08:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:05, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Due to the suggestion of King of Hearts I also nominate an alternative. Probably someone else prefer this one to the nomination. I personally prefer the original nomination. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for putting it up. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO on this one the contrast is good, the brightening is more controled and the fine details have much better quality --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 15:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm sorry, this is not an "alternative", but really another picture. --Jebulon (talk) 23:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- And what is your implication from your statement? Don't worry, not both nominations can become featured :) I do not really see a problem with that. It is a common procedure here that alternatives of the same motive from the same camera viewpoint with slightly different crop / different image editing are nominated due to hints from reviewers. See for similiar cases (1, 2, 3). If I am wrong please let me know. I should like to see you reviewing (both) photos because I am interesting in your opinion on the photos. IMHO we should stick to the images and do not spend too much time to formal considerations like "Alternative or not, that's the question here" :) --Tuxyso (talk) 07:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Also very nice. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 17:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 09:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:18, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:58, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 11:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 09:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 13:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

The chosen alternative is: File:Grand Canyon Powell Point Evening Light 02 2013.jpg

File:13-09-29-nordfriesisches-wattenmeer-RalfR-15.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2013 at 09:54:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Island Neuwerk near Hamburg in the wadden Sea, 1.4 km height; 7 km distance

Info created by Ralf Roleček - uploaded by Ralf Roleček - nominated by Ralf Roleček
Support -- Ralf Roleček 09:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. There is a clockwise tilt which should be removed, because I think it isn't the effect of the earth's curvature.  Richard  [®]  20:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 04:36, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really interesting—and nicely catched—motive. --Myrabella (talk) 06:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looks nice, somehow abstract. Small CAs (see note). IMHO you could better work on the perspective. It looks slightly CW tilted if you take a look on island Neuwerk and the tower on it (also see note). --Tuxyso (talk) 17:33, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support well done --Rjcastillo (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 22:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 09:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Barrel distortion on the horizon and tilted (the both easy to fix) --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 14:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:OT Berlin 09-13 Marcel Nguyen.jpg, withdrawn[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 08:04:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Picture shows Marcel Nguyen, a 2012 Olympics winner, who is also a professional soldier. Taken and nominated by A.Savin.
Support -- A.Savin 08:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good facial expression. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:22, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a good image but not so breathtaking that it actually takes my breath away. Kleuske (talk) 09:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You expect "breathtaking" effect from portraits with just high EV? Wow, as always, best comments by people who don't contribute any FP's themselves. --A.Savin 10:55, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please avoid personal attacks, A. Savin. It does not matter if someone has own FPCs or not. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:59, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support good, nice portrait --Christian Ferrer 11:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am with Christian: good, nice portrait. But is that enough for an FP portrait? I guess: No. There is no interesting or atmospheric light, the background is a bit unfortunate and has disturbing elements. There is a strange shadow at the edge of the uniform (see note). The EV might be high, but on FPC the photographic value is for me the most important aspect. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Ich würde knapp mit einem Pro stimmen, doch die angeschnitte linke Schulter verhindert das. Bei normaler Bekleidung wäre das für mich auch kein Problem, doch bei einer Uniform mit Schulterklappen darauf stört mich das sehr. --Ritchyblack (talk) 07:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kleuske and Tuxyso. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --A.Savin 09:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pirotski Grad (by Pudelek).JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 12:01:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 12:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 12:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps a little too exposed on the smaller tower, but nothing you can do about that. Otherwise perfect. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 08:41, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 11:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Sankt Katharina in Breien Völs am Schlern Erzengel Michael.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 08:00:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Moroder - uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jebulon (talk) 20:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bonifacio phare Madonetta.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 07:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 07:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Myrabella (talk) 07:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 08:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 15:27, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- very nice composition Arcalino (talk) 06:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 09:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Sunset at FortWhyte.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 07:59:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Teles -- —Teles «Talk to me ˱_{C L @ S}˲» 07:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not bad centring and nice colors but blurred and tilted on left --Christian Ferrer 10:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rocks at 17-Mile Drive 2013 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 07:42:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Rocks at 17-Mile-Drive at Central Pacific Coast in the USA photographed with a neutral density filter (ND1024) with 15 seconds exposure time
created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support really nice. When I saw it, I thought of nominating it. Tomer T (talk) 08:13, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:08, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 18:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llorenzi (talk) 11:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:12, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:51, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 11:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 15:56, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 07:51, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Bibliothèque de la Cité de l'architecture et du patrimoine 2007.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 11:42:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Vcurtinha - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 11:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 11:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice mood but too shallow DOF. --Laitche (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 17:18, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kaindy lake south-east Kazakhstan.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2013 at 07:48:16

Info Overexposed, much chromatic noise, messy and cut-off composition. Second try to delist this. (Original nomination)
Delist -- Tomer T (talk) 07:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We should not delist older FPs only due to minor technical shortcomings. If you read the old FPC discussion no one mentioned "noise" "overexposure" or a bad compositon. IMHO the composition is good, the same with the colors. For me it is very fussy to speak of overexposure if there is a tiny tiny part at an uninportant area of the image. Please note that the dynamic range of sensors was much worse compared to current cameras and HDR techniques were not widespread. The technical problems with the image might be an issue for a recent QIC but an interesting FP from 2006 should not be delisted therefore. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Vamps (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- per Tuxyso. Saffron Blaze (talk) 00:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- -donald- (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist I don't see anything featurable in this one. Nice place and reflection, but as a landscape it should have much better image quality. --Kadellar (talk) 15:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Due to image quality, but also based on the composition that doesn't really work for me with the centered horizontal cut. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Tuxysos arguments are convincing Arcalino (talk) 21:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Karelj (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tuxyso. --Ralf Roleček 10:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep They gave us best - we keep them as best. 80% of todays FP candidates are bellow this one, from 2006. --Mile (talk) 20:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 6 delist, 7 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. JKadavoor Jee 09:03, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mullerthal.jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 21:32:15

Info Waterfall is heavily overexposed, and IQ in general is quite low. (Original nomination)
Delist -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Arcalino (talk) 06:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nom. --Cayambe (talk) 07:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Tomer T (talk) 07:42, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Vamps (talk) 15:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- -donald- (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --M49314 (talk) 16:05, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 8 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. JKadavoor Jee 03:03, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tallinna Niguliste kirik 11-06-2013.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 18:34:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info St. Nicholas' Church, Tallinn. All by Ivar (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:14, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:27, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The photo here has a high quality (as nearly all photos of you) but I am missing something special. Neither motive, nor composition, nor light is outstanding for me and would justify an FP seal. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- composition: it seems there something is absent below? --Neptuul (talk) 07:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 15:04, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great details; but I still prefer this. JKadavoor Jee 16:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's southern side and was taken from different place and time. Current image (northern side of the church) is taken from higher ground --Ivar (talk) 17:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:07, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not special enough I'm afraid --A.Savin 17:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
comment A tiny block on the top-left corner. --Laitche (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed, Thank you. --Ivar (talk) 18:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Image quality is good but composition does not attact me. Barcex (talk) 16:50, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 17:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gran Palacio, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 69.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2013 at 16:26:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Exterior view of the he Phra Thinang Dusit Maha Prasat or Throne Hall of the Grand Palast in Bangkok, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 16:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 16:26, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good and nice but there is perspective issues, the left and the right are leaning in -- Christian Ferrer ^TALK 05:43, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I gave it a try :) Poc o² 04:39, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support it's ok for me -- Christian Ferrer ^TALK 08:03, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Way too tight upper crop, unfavorable light conditions, dull grey sky. --Ivar (talk) 09:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chilades contracta (Small Cupid).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 03:34:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Anton - uploaded by AntanO - nominated by AntanO -- Anton ^{·٠•●♥Talk♥●•٠·} 03:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Anton ^{·٠•●♥Talk♥●•٠·} 03:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Extreme noise reduction has led to lack of detail everywhere. Composition is nice but the subject is rather small. --Kadellar (talk) 12:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kadellar. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:55, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ - A little noise on background, still, fine pic.. Benison (talk) 13:33, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#Featured_picture_candidate_policy General rules 4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits. J Kadavoor J e e 05:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Kadellar -- Arcalino (talk) 16:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mono Lake Old Marina August 2013 012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 23:43:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:43, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 11:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:37, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 16:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:14, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:25, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:00, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 09:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:51, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:360° Grad Parzelle Höfle im Lecknertal.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 21:58:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info 360° Grad Parzelle Höfle im Lecknertal c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 21:58, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice contrast between white, green, and blue. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King of Hearts --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:22, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, the alternation of increasing an decreasing lines is very good here. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice, but also notable ccw tilt in the middle (note added). --Ivar (talk) 09:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose until tilt is fixed. --Ivar (talk) 05:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done eliminated remarkable tilt --Böhringer (talk) 20:01, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Support Very good now. --Ivar (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 10:09, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:11, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King of Hearts and Tuxyso. --Kadellar (talk) 12:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good without the tilt --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:59, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:39, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 16:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 22:40, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:53, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Eurema hecabe (Common Grass Yellow).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 13:10:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by AntanO -- Anton ^{·٠•●♥Talk♥●•٠·} 13:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Anton ^{·٠•●♥Talk♥●•٠·} 13:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much noise reduction and overexposed areas. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With Julian, overexposed areas / loss of details. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Julian. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:13-08-08-hongkong-by-RalfR-Panorama2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 10:07:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon to Hongkong Island

Info all by -- Ralf Roleček 10:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ralf Roleček 10:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:15, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One dust spot (see note) -- Christian Ferrer 11:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- sorry, i fail to see ist, is removed. --Ralf Roleček 11:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 14:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find an other dust spot (see note) -- Christian Ferrer 16:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- yes, also eliminated. --Ralf Roleček 18:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer 19:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 20:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question What is the angle of view? Complete 360°? I am always irritated with curved lines on architecture motives. Have you tried different projections? I wished the buildings especially the ones in the foreground non-curved but I do not know if it is possible with this angle of view. German: Welchen Blickwinkel umfasst das Panorama? Ich bin bei Architekturmotiven immer wieder irritiert, wenn dort gekurvte Linien auftauchen, wo eigentlich gerade Linien sein sollten. Speziell bei den Gebäuden im Vordergrund empfinde ich das als recht störend. Hast du mal unterschiedliche Projektionen ausprobiert? Vermutlich ist es hier unvermeidbar Kompromisse einzugehen. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Surely, Ralf can answer this precisely, but it looks like the angle of view is somewhere between 210° and 260°. Projections without any curved lines are only mathematically possible blow 180° in any direction and only reasonably far below that. The chosen projection has the advantage of not distorting anything (esp. in the vertical direction). //Ralf kann das sicher genau beantworten, aber es sieht nach etwas zwischen 210° und 260° aus. Projektionen ohne gekurvte Linien sind nur bei weniger als 180° Blickwinkel mathematisch möglich und nur bei erheblich weniger sinnvoll. Die gewählte Projektion hat (insbes. vertikal) den Vorteil, dass nichts übermäßig verzerrt ist. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 06:25, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - The angle is ca. 250°. I dont like Photos with 9000 x 1000 pixels, also i have done 14 pictures with 11mm lens and vertical orientation of the camera. Leider nur auf deutsch die gesamte Geschichte des Fotos: http://www.fahrradmonteur.de/Panorama_in_Hongkong --Ralf Roleček 12:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 11:29, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 19:46, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support after reading the whole story of the image -- Arcalino (talk) 15:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 13:07, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

Image:Catedral de la Almudena - 130826 211731.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 09:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Barcex - uploaded by Barcex - nominated by Pedro J Pacheco -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 09:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 09:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 10:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 10:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support El truco del parque, buenas vistas! ;) --Kadellar (talk) 12:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 17:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. Composition, light and framing work for me. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:27, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice colors, crisp detail. Does everything it needs to do right right. Daniel Case (talk) 18:01, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pymouss Let’s talk - 20:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like to crop a bit the lower part (If there wasn't a lamp on the bottom right.), Still good :) --Laitche (talk) 21:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 13:08, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Warsaw 07-13 img07 Old town.jpg, withdrawn[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 18:16:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by A.Savin
Support --A.Savin 18:16, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition does not impress me, unfortunately. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Detail quality and light is good, but the composition is a bit boring and not convincing. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --Z 07:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:38, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Again, just looks like a picture from someone's vacation Flickr stream. Daniel Case (talk) 14:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --A.Savin 09:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iglesia de San Ildefonso - 01.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 10:18:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Church of Saint Ildefonso, Toledo, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment purple ca (see note) -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Notable noise in the middle. --Ivar (talk) 12:46, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- For both: I can fix the slight CA, but it's difficult to remove that noise, because that part was much darker than the rest and therefore underexposed so I didn't get clipped whites somewhere else. What do you think of the previous version of the image? --Kadellar (talk) 09:39, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  Done for both : I've tried to edit your picure revert if you don't like -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Let's keep it, thanks. Iifar, noise is gone now! --Kadellar (talk) 12:10, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Kadellar (talk) 11:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 13:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pale Blue Dot.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2013 at 04:12:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Voyager 1 having recently crossed the heliopause, entering interstellar space, it is once more time to Ignore All Rules, renominating for Featured Picture one of the most iconic and awe-inspiring of all space photographs. True, it is undersized, grainy, poorly composed, and marred by scattered light; its subject occupies less than a single pixel. But the EV is fantastic. As Sagan wrote: "From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every 'superstar,' every 'supreme leader,' every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam." created by NASA - uploaded by Gerbrant - nominated by Stigmatella aurantiaca
Support -- Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 04:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 07:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- In case this requires an explanation: I would consider this to be one of the ten most iconic images of the last century. The low quality is why this is so famous and philosophically significant. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:11, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose At the risk to sound unfriendly (today is not April 1th, is it?): We are talking about featured pictures and not about interesting stories or background information (therefore we have featured articles). --Tuxyso (talk) 08:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't know whether this will pass or fail; but there were many previous reviews (Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pale Blue Dot.png, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pale Blue Dot unaltered.jpg) and finally ended up considering it as a VI (although a different jpeg version). J Kadavoor J e e 11:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An image where 99.99964% is noise and sun flare and the remainder is an artificial enlargement of a 0.12 pixel original. I assume there are some mathematics that legitimately achieved this that I don't understand. It has high EV for its own article/self, hence the en:WP FP and valued-image status. But it isn't featurable as an an image. Colin (talk) 11:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is Commons FP, not en FP. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as the other opposers. -- Arcalino (talk) 21:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is a very interesting pic, maybe a VI, but far away from excellent. -- -donald- (talk) 08:00, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 09:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flickr - Government Press Office (GPO) - THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE LAUREATES FOR 1994 IN OSLO..jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2013 at 22:02:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Sa'ar Ya'akov (Government Press Office, Israel) - uploaded by Matanya - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 22:02, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support historic photo of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat after winning the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1994, following the signing on the Oslo Accords. -- Tomer T (talk) 22:02, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Achim Raschka (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 15:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For an official photo I'd expect them to be looking at the camera and a photo with less noise. --99of9 (talk) 08:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a note: it is a very famous picture, at least in Israel. It is also of course unrepeatable - the moment itself, and two of the people here (Rabin and Arafat) are deceased. Peres is 90 years old. Tomer T (talk) 04:11, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - enormous historical value, with or w/o noise --A.Savin 18:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Per A. Savin : it was a day of hope for the Middle-East and for the whole world. --JLPC (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support High historical value and really a great message of hope. Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 12:22, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support M49314 (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 09:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Benny Trapp Epirusfrosch Pelophylax epeiroticus.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2013 at 12:51:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Benny Trapp - uploaded by Benny Trapp - nominated by Achim Raschka (talk) -- Achim Raschka (talk) 12:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 12:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support der grüne Strich ist ja putzig, das ist Tarnung. --Ralf Roleček 12:48, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 13:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Earth tones RULE! Per Ralf, Ich liebe die grünen Strichen! Daniel Case (talk) 18:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, as said. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 06:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:43, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 19:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hairline DOF even at F25; another example of the wrong combination to tools for a big subject. Good, if the "subject" is only the eye of Epirus Water Frog. J Kadavoor J e e 05:23, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Citron (talk) 14:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 14:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians

File:Alamo 001.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 04:14:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by mattstone911 - uploaded by Mattstone911 - nominated by Mattstone911 -- Mattstone911 (talk) 04:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mattstone911 (talk) 04:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting composition. However, there are many JPEG artifacts and the clouds are blown out. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Der Himmel und Teile des unteren Fenster sind schwarz ohne Zeichnung. Artefakte im gesamten Bild. --Ritchyblack (talk) 07:51, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose schlechte Schwarzweißumwandlung, Artefakte --Ralf Roleček 18:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brassica napus 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 21:25:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by TiHa - uploaded by Prazak - nominated by Ahura21 -- PERSIA♠ 21:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PERSIA♠ 21:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strong coluor noise in some areas, oversharpening artifacts and colour fringes at the bottom. Sadly, 2005 compacts had very limited image quality by today's standards. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 06:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Julian. --Ritchyblack (talk) 07:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Julian. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paisley Abbey New Gargoyles.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 18:25:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Colin - uploaded by Colin - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm nominating this as a poster rather than a set as the images individually are smaller than the size threshold. These gargoyles were created in 1991 to replace those that had worn-away over the centuries. The set includes "see no evil", "speak no evil", "hear no evil" and an "alien". I Hope you enjoy them! -- Colin (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One frame is rather unsharp (note added). --Ivar (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It isn't as sharp as the others, I agree. I was hand-holding at 300mm (450mm full-frame equivalent), iso 400, f/5.6 and 1/320s. I guess either my Sony SteadyShot let me down, or the gargoyle moved. I tried to take a few shots of each but for some reason this one only had one shot. He's not downsampled, so the flaws aren't hidden. -- Colin (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC) Actually, I do have another one of this taken a few minutes later. I'd bumped the iso up to 800 and the sun came out so took them again at 1/2000s. However, there isn't any more detail in that one (due to the higher iso I guess) and the sunlight makes hard shadows and warmer colours so he wouldn't fit into the set. :-( Colin (talk) 19:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose until it's fixed. --Ivar (talk) 12:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Replaced with sharp one. -- Colin (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support At least something new. --Mile (talk) 20:13, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ~~As marked by Ifar: no 8 is unsharp.~~ --Tuxyso (talk) 22:19, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've replaced with gargoyle 8 with another of him taken a few minutes later. This time he stayed still :-) I adjusted the colour temp and contrast so he fits in with the set. After some tweaking, he did actually have much more detail than the first unsharp one. Hope this is enough. Colin (talk) 20:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support now. I like the idea of composing a single image from different figures. With no 8 a more frontal shot (with more face) had been better but the sharpness is now OK. Probably your idea will become a pattern for similiar shots. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:39, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about you, but I'm quite happy that Death is looking the other way :-) Colin (talk) 20:46, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Had not realized that :) --Tuxyso (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very nice. I like the innovative idea of presenting the individual shots together. High educational value and nicely shot. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Frank. J Kadavoor J e e 05:41, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice work. --Ritchyblack (talk) 08:05, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting. No words for the alien! :) --Kadellar (talk) 09:43, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support it's a pity for the noise reduction on the no 8 but good work --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have lowered the noise reduction on no 8 now. Colin (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Better, thanks --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this! --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good idea. --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:52, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:16, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:57, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice work. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Bush Cockroach.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 13:17:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Cyron Ray Macey - uploaded by User:FlickreviewR - nominated by Benison P Baby -- Benison (talk) 13:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benison (talk) 13:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- Here too?? Well, As on English Wikipedia, nice focus 117.244.55.77 13:34, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, IPs can't vote for FPCs..

Oppose head out of focus -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Christian Ferrer. --Joydeep _Talk 06:29, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 14:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ligne Petite Ceinture parc Montsouris Paris.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 20:58:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Myrabella - nominated by Paris 16
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much for this unexpected nomination. I am glad that you like this photograph, more personal than my ususal work for Commons. --Myrabella (talk) 07:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pymouss Let’s talk - 20:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this would profit from a light reduction in brightness (makes the colours much nicer) and a little counter-clockwise rotation. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Per Julian H.--Jebulon (talk) 16:10, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your interest. New version uploaded as suggested: slight reduction in brightness and little counter-clockwise rotation. --Myrabella (talk) 19:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support J Kadavoor J e e 05:37, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive --Z 07:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support good centing!-- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:28, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Paris 16 (talk) 21:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:North Sea on the beach near Årgab, Hvide Sande Sogn, Jutland, Denmark.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2013 at 18:51:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral No comment -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Oups, very bad idea (one more) for no comment. Nothing against the composition but it's blurred and lacks of fine details. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unremarkable composition. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support no comment? Composition? Excuse, to me ist a good composition, nice color. Sorry for german. Ich finde solche sparsamen Farben sehr gut, der helle Schein am Horizont und in der Mitte steht im Gegensatz zur Sone, die zwar verzerrt ist, das ist aber der Brennweite geschuldet. Nicht ganz scharf, was ich nicht verstehe aber das Bild an sich gefällt mir einfach. --Ralf Roleček 21:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
color banding and lack of fine detail. --Ivar (talk) 06:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think a composition of just sea, sun and fishing boat could work but the sun is too near the top and the boat far too small. Also the image looks like it has had very heavy noise-reduction applied, so there's just no fine detail. I also see colour banding in the clouds. -- Colin (talk) 10:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nuevo Palacio Schleissheim, Oberschleissheim, Alemania, 2013-08-31, DD 09.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 04:45:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info View and mirror of the New Schleissheim Palace at sunset, Oberschleissheim, Germany. All by me, Poc o² 04:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 04:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One dust spot (see note) -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 08:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done, thanks, Poc o² 05:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 10:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is up to you, but what about a tighter crop? Maybe there's too much water and sky (and therefore the palace is smaller in comparison) --Kadellar (talk) 12:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Comment Alternative vesion with suggested crop by Kadellar Poc o² 17:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the original Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support This one is maybe a more typical composition, but imo it helps show the palace better. The other one is nice too but more... artistic (?) with the empty space. --Kadellar (talk) 09:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poc o² 21:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Benny Trapp Pelophylax kl grafi Grafscher Hybridfrosch.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2013 at 10:36:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Benny Trapp - uploaded by Benny Trapp - nominated by Achim Raschka (talk) -- Achim Raschka (talk) 10:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 10:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMHO convincing in every respect. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very good lighting. There could be more contrast (tone in tone) between the main motive and background IMO. To be not eaten by predators this is certainly good of course :-)  Richard  [®]  20:32, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support sorry for german, perfekte Tarnung, das wird hier deutlich. Das versteht man auch erst vor einem solchen Hintergrund. --Ralf Roleček 10:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 06:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:44, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 13:15, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians

File:Mons, Hérault 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2013 at 07:22:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition and clouds. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 04:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 06:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:10, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 11:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pymouss Let’s talk - 20:13, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 10:48, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Kenges Rakishev (Kenes Rakhishev).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 13:09:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Portrait of Kazakh business leader Kenges Rakishev.

Info created by staff photographer - uploaded by Kenges Rakishev - nominated by Marcus Qwertyus -- Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 13:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fine detail. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 13:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looks likes the photographer was kind of forced to keep the company logo and ruined the composition (IMHO). Probably a tighter crop would have done the job better. Barcex (talk) 19:39, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose suboptimal composition, lacks contrast (very grey) and not a very compelling portriat. Kleuske (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Popemobile assassination attempt John Paul II 13 may 1981 Vatican 13.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 17:02:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 17:02, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support In this FIAT "popemobile", the 13 of may 1981, Piazza San Pietro in Rome, Vatican City, blessed Pope John Paul II was victim of an assassination attempt perpetrated by Mehmet Ali Ağca (See the picture on the wall). This vehicle is now in the "Carriage museum" of the Vatican City, where I took this picture, which has IMO a great historical and encyclopedic value. -- Jebulon (talk) 17:02, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No doubt the image is very informative and usable in Wikipedia. However, I do not think the overal quality of the picture is good enough for a FP. Barcex (talk) 18:54, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please be more precise ?--Jebulon (talk) 19:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Me, I think the quality is widely sufficient but it's the composition that is not working, the fact that the image have a great historical and encyclopedic value is not enough to make it featured. To be featured an image in more of its encyclopedic value must to be attractive. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please be more precise ? I can add some (artificial) light, but that's all I can do. Technicaly, I had no tripod, no flash, and there was no natural light (underground museum). So I had to put my camera... where I could... Any suggestion ? Please notice that there is no other picture like this one in "Commons", it is a unique document, with the photograph on the wall...--Jebulon (talk) 20:36, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For this kind of angled cars a wide angle shots does not work for me. At 18mm the car looks somehow disproportional because the front part is too much accentuated. Another problem with the composition is that the car looks as it drives out of the image. There is too less space at the bottom left. Due to the high shooting position the car is bent down but I guess it stands on a flat floor. I can imagine that the shooting conditions there were far from being optimal but these points speak against FP imho. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:53, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Crop at bottom too tight, background cluttered. A quality image for sure but that's as far as it goes. Daniel Case (talk) 05:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support good subject, good color, as I am not religious the Fiat Popemobile is a classic automotive and is the Popemobile for excellence.. and I like this photo: very emotional for those who love cars, and can intrigue even if many people will use it as a "picture of the day" --Pava (talk) 08:50, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info no oppose but also no support because i don't like Photos of cars with wide-angle lenses. Sorry. --Ralf Roleček 10:35, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Pava as a cute Fiat 1107 "Nuova Campagnola" although I'm am a bit religious. I don't like this "complicated, tight, wide-angle composition"; but Jeb's comment convinced me. J Kadavoor J e e 16:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support : H.V., but not only : the unbalanced composition, the cropped picture and the distorted car tells a lot about what was in believers' as well as in non-believers' minds on the day the assassination attempt took place. (Sorry for my English). --JLPC (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The car look distorted and the centring is not good IMO (the cropped picure on the wall is disturbing) --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:40, 41 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The picture on the wal is to show what happened in this car...--Jebulon (talk) 13:38, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crop/angle and reflection on the windscreen.--M49314 (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Achim Raschka (talk) 09:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please explain shortly why ? Thanks in advance.--Jebulon (talk) 13:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 18:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Polu.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2013 at 11:37:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Rice pilaf, a traditional dish and staple food in the cuisines of many Asian countries.
Info Created by Mizu Basyo - uploaded to ja.wikipedia by Mizu Basyo - transferred to commons by Off-shell - nominated by Off-shell -- Off-shell (talk) 11:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Off-shell (talk) 11:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it is a good example of well-done food photography, which we lack in the FP gallery, especially regarding cooked food (see Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink). Tomer T (talk) 14:56, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry. This will do for encyclopedic purposes, but it wouldn't make me go out of my way to eat it. Even if the bad crops at top and bottom and DOF issues at the top were taken care of, the aesthetics just aren't there for me. No wow. Daniel Case (talk) 18:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad crop (or centring) --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:10, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 15:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good picture, but IMO not enough WOW for FP.--M49314 (talk) 15:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 17:00, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bamberg BW 2013-06-19 17-17-19.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 08:38:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 09:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment purple ca (see note) --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ok for the roof at right but there is always a little ca on the top of the Altes Rathaus --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Another try ;-) --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support there is always a very little ca but it's better --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arcalino (talk) 15:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:27, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 15:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:US Capitol east side.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2013 at 17:33:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Comment There's a bit of edge unsharpness in the image (at both ends of the Capitol's respective wings) which is simply due to the unavoidably poor border resolution of my ultrawide angle lense. Stepping further back from my position was not possible.
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support sehr gute Arbeit --Böhringer (talk) 21:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Etwas unterbelichtet aber gerade noch gut genug, vielleicht ist da noch was raus zuholen. --Ritchyblack (talk) 08:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose artifact at left and at right --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! -- Arcalino (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info new version: exposure adjusted Done, some work on details --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:14, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is there cloning artifacts? (see note) --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, no. It's just low border resolution, imo. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Israel-2013-Aerial-Temple Mount 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 03:27:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Sunset aerial view of the Temple Mount, and some of the surrounding Old City of Jerusalem, created, uploaded, and nominated by Godot13 (talk) 03:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Godot13 (talk) 03:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but too blurry/grainy. Medium format digital tends to be surprisingly bad at high ISO; a full-frame or even cropped-sensor DSLR will do better. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The resolution is outstanding and the photo is sharp. The only problem I see is colour noise, and good RAW editing tools are very efficient at reducing that without having a too significant impact on colours or detail of the image. I think this might work, I'm not certain though. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion Julian H.. I have made a very slight adjustment using the raw file. Should I upload this as an ALT version, or simply to the existing file?-Godot13 (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use the same file, just overwrite it. -- -donald- (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have overwritten the file with a new version with very slight noise reduction. This is not an area of strength for me, so it may not be enough (or even correctable for an FP). Thank you KoH, Julian H., and -donald- for your comments.--Godot13 (talk) 20:48, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a lot better, but it's tilted again now. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Julian H.- You were spot-on: I corrected tilt by 1.5 degrees.-Godot13 (talk) 21:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support To avoid a speedy closure. I think this deserves more reviews. J Kadavoor J e e 10:46, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is extraordinary in the way that aerial photo from mid-format cameras are very rare on Commons. The resolution and detail quality is very good. But that's it for me. Nearly the complete area of the photo is in shadow - very unfortunate for an aerial view. I cannot see a compositional idea which is eye-catching for me. I am not sure but on the small bright areas there are imho some CAs visible. All in all a surely valueable image but no FP for me. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:50, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 06:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Novodevichy Convent night view.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 20:07:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Max_Ryazanov -- Max_Ryazanov (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Max_Ryazanov (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice! though the white is blown out on the top of towers. --Laitche (talk) 21:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overexposed (per Laitche). Might be correctable in RAW-editing. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:24, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:50, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Macrocranion tupaiodon 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 18:32:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Llez - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:25, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks to Tomer T for the nomination --Llez (talk) 06:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 20:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 02:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 13:03, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Diego Simeone - 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 15:46:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Diego Simeone during a news conference after a football game as coach of Atlético de Madrid. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barcex (talk) 19:51, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too tight crop (left and right). --Z 07:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 13:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cluttered and distracting background, tight crops as noted above and overall the pose does not make me think this is anyone special. Daniel Case (talk) 14:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't think it's a distracting background, it's just a typical background for a press conference for sports games (this is the one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMM_W9QvSQ8), so I think it's describing a common moment of a manager's work, and it's quite unfocused. Crop might be tight at left side, but not at the rest of places. Must it be someone special to be FP? Since when? Besides, it is someone special for thousands of football fans in Spain, Italy and Argentina, because he was a good player and he's doing great as a manager. --Kadellar (talk) 16:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say he wasn't special, just that this photo doesn't make him look like he is. And yes, the background at the press conference may be the sort of thing he must often be photographed in front of, but that still doesn't make it any less of a distraction. Daniel Case (talk) 02:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think that the background is a key part of the story being telled by the picture, and it is reasonably well blurred. That and his facial expression give the clue that the guy has his complete attention on a question being asked. Tight crop is also welcome IMHO as it helps the viewer concentrate on the important part: the face. Barcex (talk) 13:37, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without someone telling me he's being asked a question, I had no idea that's what was going on. As it is, his facial expression could just as easily be read the way I did—as if he's had an entirely too long day and is staring off into the distance from fatigue. Daniel Case (talk) 02:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 17:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ворота Святые(между Успенской и Прядильной башнями).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 10:36:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created&uploaded by Zleha2004 - nominated by Ю. Данилевский (talk) 10:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Solovetsky Monastery. View from the south-west.
Support -- Ю. Данилевский (talk) 10:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 11:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A building in scaffolding is always going to be a difficult sell on FP. The lighting and size/resolution aren't anything special. The composition with the boat is nice (if clichéd) but the building seems chopped on left/right sides. I prefer File:Историко-культурный комплекс Соловецких островов.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 11:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per Colin. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Colin. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:18, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Colin. --M49314 (talk) 14:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral IMO the composition of File:Историко-культурный комплекс Соловецких островов.jpg is better, but fine details and expo are a bit better in this one --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kerch ChurchOfStJohn.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2013 at 06:58:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Sergey Ashmarin - uploaded by Solundir - nominated by Ю. Данилевский (talk) 06:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info Church of St John the Baptist. Kerch, Crimea. The oldest preserved church in the territory of Ukraine. Construction VIII-X centuries. Bell tower of the XIX century.
Support -- Ю. Данилевский (talk) 06:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ritchyblack (talk) 07:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's slight red CA. Given the rather low resolution that should be fixed imo (see note). --Kadellar (talk) 09:50, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much blue clipping in the sky imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:21, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support beautiful building and nice composition, tighter crop at the left and at the bottom may make it better. --Z 07:31, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Niinsaare järv.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 19:51:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Lake Niinsaare, Kurtna Landscape Reserve, Northeastern Estonia. All by Ivar (talk) 19:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 19:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is nice, but so was your File:Neeruti Tagajärv.jpg and File:Neeruti Eesjärv.jpg FPs. All three are calm lakes with autumn trees. There's nothing that identifies the scene to me. So I'm beginning to think this is like sunsets. Pretty but not strong educational value. Colin (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Beautiful, but in light of the very similar FPs by the same author. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support great photo. in the rules of FPC i read nothing about "educational value" --Ralf Roleček 11:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To quote the criteria:

"Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:

almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,

night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,

beautiful does not always mean valuable."

Perhaps the criteria should be amended to spell out what this "value" is. From our Welcome page:

"Wikimedia Commons is a media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content."

The "value" is surely its use as "educational media content", rather than stock images for inspirational posters or for postcards, say. -- Colin (talk) 11:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support For the value : the kind (species) of trees on the bank can be much more interested than Alien's head for someone I think (not for you certainly), friendly -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:10, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I don't think it lacks educational value (if it did we'd delete it). And I don't think it has so little such value that I'd oppose. Just indistinguishable from the other Estonian lake photographs because they all lack any context/surroundings. Colin (talk) 12:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the lakes you have cited are look alike, it's an other very important and valuable information for geographer or others scientifics, thanks to have emphasing that. .We are going to put out mountains in Estonia to help Ivar for it's FP. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And to help Colin to distinguish the photos of Ivar -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One only has to look at Ivar's other pictures to know there is plenty scenic variation in Estonia and a variety of composition options. This is exactly the same composition, lighting and subject (give or take) as the other two FPs. I'm currently reading a book on outdoor photography with lots of pictures from both Scotland and from Estonia and none of them are the same. Colin (talk) 18:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What a pity this commonness of these lakes, Ivar cannot make a book of photos with these lakes. Maybe only an educative book on these lakes becauses the photos are very good. Question : if I find a similar lake in my country, It is not necessary that I get bored to photograph it, you saw those there? It will be only a "sunset" of more? -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:44, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Christian, judging the value of this picture is as subjective as judging the composition or the lighting. All these aspects are absolutely part of the FP criteria (despite what Ralf said) yet are personal opinions. I respect your opinion, and I ask you to respect mine, not to mock it. Thank-you. Colin (talk) 18:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To respect your opinion and not to mock it? yes ok but what is it? Your first comment : "Pretty but not strong educational value" your second comment : "Oh I don't think it lacks educational value". I don't understand your opinion. Me, my opinion is that it's not the same lake so all these pictures are valuable, there is nothing more to add. Me, my opinion is if Ivar or someone else photograph all the lakes in earth with exactly the same light and exactly the same composition, I sign right now and I think Commons will be winner and this is objectively and not subjectively. It is also just my opinion and you can also respect my opinion. It's you who had answer my first comment, it was not necessary because it was also only my opinion and I repeat it : "For the value : the kind (species) of trees on the bank can be much more interested than Alien's head for someone I think (not for you certainly), friendly". Now, if you write another comment, be sure me too. Really friendly -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:15, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I forgot, don't worry, a little of hot pepper in the discussion is not so bad (IMO), and I thank you very much for this exchange -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! I forgot, if you add comment, me too, have I alraidy say it? -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:37, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying the image isn't "valuable" as though that was something an image either has or has not. It is not a binary measure. Of course there is value in this image and we will differ as to how much we see. If Ivar wants to take 1000 images the same of different lakes then Commons is a "winner" as you say. Like QI is filled with hundreds of similar pictures of trains, though I assume they are different trains. However, the FP criteria require "pictures should be in some way special" and discourages pictures that "are not in essence different from others". I think after two nearly identical FPs, the third is no longer special enough for FP. Others clearly disagree. We can discuss opinions and disagree without mocking. Colin (talk) 20:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but it's not mocking it's juts my answers. I ask you once again : so because there is "two nearly identical FPs", if I find a lake in my region with the same light and without a mountain in background (or some exotic thing like in your book), it's not necessary that I nominate it to FPC (have you a book of my region, I begin to be afraid that my photos do not correspond to the idea that you are made about my region) (is it mocking? if yes, it's you the first who compare our candidate pictures to your book)? Or another question, if the picture candidate of Ivar was in Italy, or USA, could we compare these images between her?. If no why do you compare theses images of different lakes (only because you see just lake, bank and sky or light : it's only a lake!!!) or from which distance between the lakes it's acceptable to have another FP like the both cited. All these questions are serious, can you answer correctly? Now I go to job, see you later -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it is a good idea to intervene your heated discussion but I rather try it: I am on Colin's side that there should be a certain variation of motives and compositions with FPCs. In the past I got much bored by the 1000th NASA FPC and sometimes voted with oppose. Another example are the excellent shell photos by Llez. They have surely a high EV (for biologists) but do seldom include enough Wow for me to support on FPC - such images are better placed on VI or on the language-specific FPCs. The only flaw in Colin's argumentation is to take "value" or "educational value" as argument against yet another Estonian sea reflection photo. Especially in the German Wikipedia terms like "educational value" or "encyclopedic additional benefit" are taken as justification for everything if someone does not like a photo. As I've argued there such (scientific) terms pretend an objectivity which does not exist for photos. It would be more honest to say that one does not like a photo or got bored because it is the third very similar shot - on FPC an eligible reason for declining a photo. Let us talk about excellent photos and not about value which no one can measure. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Tuxyso. I agree the focus on ev as the only or main issue is perhaps misplaced especially as it may be loaded with other meaning for wikipedias. Like my last comment above, it is less special because it is so similar to the last two. For a re-user, these three are largely interchangeable images of Estonian lakes in autumn, which says something about their value to the project to me, but to someone else they may judge value differently. All three are very good individually, and I'm not discouraging anyone from taking and uploading such a picture. But three identical pictures is not what FP is about. I do think opinions on "value" are important however, and our varied opinions on this make FP interesting and the reason why we want !votes from so many different people. But such opinions are from the gut and I don't think picking them apart with forensic precision is a useful exercise. Colin (talk) 07:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree your point about valued, it's subjective, and in more I did not speak the first one on about the valued. So I have the right to answer about that and for me it's the most valuable AND nice picture of Lake Niinsaare in Wikimedia, on internet (and maybe in the world?), so it give it a big, big value, I think. Interchangeable images of Estonian lakes? is it a joke? I will try to not mock about this sentence. Different Lakes are not interchangeable, different shells are not interchangeable, different butterflies are not interchangeable. But maybe we can widen this reasoning, you could say "Interchangeable images of Northern Europpean lakes" or "Interchangeable images of Europpean lakes", where is the limit please, be more precise, is my region concerned? You have not to compare two pictures of two different shells species, You have not to compare two pictures of two different butterflies species, You have not to compare two pictures of two different castles, You have not to compare two pictures of two different Lakes. And You have not to compare any picture to your book picture (is there a photo of this specific lake in your book?). You can oppose for not WOW, ok, for the poverty of the composition (in your opinion), ok, I agree. But if you talk about valued and subjectively, and you did, it give me the right to me to be also a bit subjective and to say that I said in my first comment. You have promoted in the past excellent shell photos and now you are tired about that, please what is the precise number of featurable images of shells, butterflies, castles and other lakes? Can you be more precise. If you want you can oppsose but if you talk about value you have not the right but the duty to be objective before to be subjective and to not compare different subjects. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, I don't think picking people's opinions apart with forensic precision is a useful exercise. Your long argument about interchangeable just sounds like argument for argument sake to me. These images are, to me, largely identical. That's just a quick judgement. Perhaps you see a significant difference. Perhaps you view this image more valuable and special than I do. I respect that and am not trying to change your mind. One interesting thing to me is that one can visit different lakes and yet still come away with an identical picture. Perhaps that says something about Estonia or it says something about the kind of image Iifar wants to get. Which is fine. Christian, I haven't opposed this picture. I made a comment. I haven't tried to ridicule your opinion as you have mine, so please stop. I'm unwatching. Colin (talk) 12:09, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And I end with my first comment :"For the value : the kind (species) of trees on the bank can be much more interested than Alien's head for someone I think (not for you certainly), friendly" --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support At first look, I thought they three are of the same place; but they are of different lakes, so definitely they have "enough" distinct educational value (even though it seems marginal to me as a layman point of view). We can't predict all the educational reuses now. I agree with Colin on the importance of educational value which is a basic requirement in Commons. (Every butterfly species is different to me; but for some people with a different tastes, they are all just another butterflies.) J Kadavoor J e e 14:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. --Laitche (talk) 15:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 20:53, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:2013.06.27.-27-Ahrensberg-Spitzenfleck-Weibchen.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 18:28:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Spitzenfleck - Libellula fulva, Weibchen (female). All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 18:28, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Hockei (talk) 18:28, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:35, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ile de Thau, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2013 at 11:38:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:38, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Notable noise on the water. --Ivar (talk) 12:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done New version -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support the crane is annoying, but otherwise very good compo, light, and detail --A.Savin 18:11, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm afraid the composition isn't saying wow to me. The background with the oyster farms are interesting but the foreground isn't grabbing my attention. And that crane. Colin (talk) 20:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 11:13, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 11:47, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Colin. --Z 07:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If only that crane wasn't there I would've vote in support.--M49314 (talk) 13:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 17:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clevedon Pier 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 17:20:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Saffron Blaze - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 17:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 17:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light and careful composition - the lamps from the pier exactly match the top of the mountain line in the background. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 09:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Colin (talk) 10:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ very nice and beautiful sunset -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC) but I change to Neutral -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would have liked a more panoramic crop. Still great! Barcex (talk) 11:44, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Wonderful photo, but heavily (and unnecessarily) oversharpened. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose for now. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support much better now. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 21:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 11:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 14:00, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support but Oppose~~ per Julian, halos around pier should be fixed. --Laitche (talk) 16:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Very nice, but oversharpened. --Ivar (talk) 17:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Per Ivar and others: "glowing" cables destroy the whole beauty of the picture. Sting (talk) 23:23, 18 October 2013 (UTC) Still visible halos but much better now. Sting (talk) 13:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not convinced the glowing cables have anything to do with sharpening. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure these are sharpening halos and look to me about the level advised (in books like The Digital Negative) for printing but a little too much for screen. However, that advice is for the final copy at a resolution to be viewed. Do they disappear when the image is reduced down to standard display size or even pro 27" or retina displays? Unfortunately, no. I agree such a calming picture doesn't warrant razor sharpness. So I would recommend reducing the sharpening if you processed the raw. If this is an out-of-camera JPG then we're stuck I guess. That said, I'd deeply envious of this image and wouldn't consider opposing over such a technicality. Not only is the sun perfectly aligned, but, as Tuxyso notes, the lamps along the pier align with the hills. The long 4s exposure has nicely smoothed the sea without losing all detail (per the current fad for unreal milky-soft sea/sky). -- Colin (talk) 10:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have the raw so I will give it a look, but if these were sharpening halos why aren't all the sets of cables affected? It seems to be happening to just the brightly backlit ones so I just assumed an effect caused by the sun's glow on the cables and the long exposure. Saffron Blaze (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All cables have halos. The extremely strong halos are only on the thick ones, because the thin ones aren't fully black (don't have such a high contrast im comparison to the background). It's not possible that the sun, in this position, could generate any glow around a steel cable, let alone on both sides. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Nice, but per Julian and Laitche. --Kadellar (talk) 12:08, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for reworking! --Kadellar (talk) 10:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Regardless of what created the cables, I don't really see a problem. Daniel Case (talk) 14:08, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Uploaded a re-do from RAW. No sharpening at all. Saffron Blaze (talk) 19:46, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support now. --Ivar (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support new version. Nice composition and mood, Thanks for your work. --Laitche (talk) 20:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment New version again? I'm not going to change my vote but I voted to the second version and I prefer the second, no need to level adjustment imo :) --Laitche (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I notice on upload the first edit was considerably darker than the original so I adjusted the second edit to be more like the original. You are right though they are both fine. Not sure which I prefer. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am caught up in some kind a caching hell. I can't tell if the right file is current. I went with no sharpening and brightness matched to original. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:13, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I find I need to use Ctrl-F5 on firefox to force a reload of the image when a new one is uploaded. I'm guessing that as the filename is the same, and the date-time of the photograph remains the same, the browser doesn't know to download a new version. Don't know about other browsers. Colin (talk) 07:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice work -- MJJR (talk) 21:02, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:53, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Winery caves.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2013 at 23:14:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Rows of bottles of sparkling wine in Artyomovsk winery cellar (cave). Making of sparkling wine using the traditional champagne method. Created by ArtWinery - uploaded by ArtWinery - nominated by Off-shell -- Off-shell (talk) 23:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Off-shell (talk) 23:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --So much denoised that it makes it an abstract image. But nice. Sting (talk) 23:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Sting and in more very tilted, maybe artistic but not the best valuable for an en encyclopedia Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:57, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I thnk this image can well be used in articles about the sparkling wine production. Thousands of bottles stored in a cave for wine fermentation look IMO quite impressive. I also don't see why the tilt should be a problem. Off-shell (talk) 15:28, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Featured pictures" is about more than just usefulness – technical quality is another important factor and the quality of this very image is extremely low (view it in full size ant it'll become obvious). Might be a candidate for Commons:VI if it's the best of its kind. --El Grafo (talk) 09:43, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strange editing. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:53, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vormsi tuletorn 29-03-2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2013 at 17:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Vormsi lighthouse, all by Ivar (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superb -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You have the art to put everybody all right -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I believe lights can be raised a bit without blowing out highlights. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support, would personally prefer even more highlight raising though, so that the snow is not grey. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:27, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Remarkable quality. --Laitche (talk) 06:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support but I agree with King of Hearts, that would be a very nice improvement imo too. --Kadellar (talk) 11:54, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info New version with a little more exposure uploaded. --Ivar (talk) 14:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Technically very good and detailed. However, I'm not fascinated by the red-roofed building on the right or the trees on the right. File:Saxby majakka.jpg indicates that moving the lighthouse to the right might have captured some sea instead, which one might expect in a lighthouse picture. And File:Saxby majakas Vormsi.jpg shows potential for other shots making use of the sea-ice and other lighting conditions. -- Colin (talk) 19:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 06:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 15:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Spain - Chile - 10-09-2013 - Geneva - Ballboy.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2013 at 11:13:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 11:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pleclown (talk) 11:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Interesting but I shall have preferred a larger crop (or centring) with the entire boy -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He was too close, like 1 or 2 meters. Pleclown (talk) 20:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like that the face isn't visible. And the objective in the back makes it even worse. About the composition I think that it would had been better if the boy would be on the left half of the image so that there would had been the boy and the green grass. Kruusamägi (talk) 23:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The non-visible face is no problem for me - could make the photo interesting. But the composition does not work for me. I see no relationship between the main subject (boy) and background. The mid pale of the goal in the background crosses the boy's head. The pink band around the lens distracts from the boy. The composition had also been better of some aspects from the football game had been visible thus is becomes obvious that the boy looks wishful at the football game and the football players. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:44, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:47, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Death Valley Mesquite Flats Sand Dunes 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2013 at 08:12:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Mesquite Flats Sand Dunes in Death Valley
created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kleuske (talk) 09:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 09:49, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really like the composition. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Me too. Nice composition with rocks and sand. --Myrabella (talk) 11:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Though I'd prefer if the people were walking into the picture (to their deaths! ha ha!) than out. -- Colin (talk) 11:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I think they are on the way to the dunes and are walking into the picture. There are much more people (as far as I remember about 20) hidden from the sand hills in front of the dunes. I took a moment when only these two person were visible and when the sun lightens the dunes well. You have a time window of about 15 minutes for that nice light in the evening but unfortunately the weather was cloudy at that day and I had luck to got the shot in a 1 minute window of good light. When there are clouds in front of the sun the photo gets rid of its mood. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I appreciate that technically they may end up further into the scene as they walk round the dunes, but they (the man in particular) are facing out of the picture. As an experiment, try flipping the couple horizontally. It is a stronger composition. But not reality, so... Colin (talk) 19:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support An example of "wow!" J Kadavoor J e e 11:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice composition! -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 16:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:23, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sehr schön. Gute Komposition, gutes Licht, technisch einwandfrei. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:26, 19 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]
Support great landscape, congratulations. --Kadellar (talk) 11:38, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:37, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 16:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:49, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Hawker Sea Fury FB 10 F-AZXJ OTT 2013 10.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 09:11:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me (thanks for the press accreditation to WPDE). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^talk 09:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barcex (talk) 10:09, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support You captured a nice moment. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 14:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support （・_・） Laitche (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:44, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support incredible panning shot considering airplane speed! Royalbroil 05:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --കാർത്തുമ്പി (talk) 17:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning shot of a beautiful airplane in warm autumn light with a nice, clean background. This, ladies and gentlemen, is how you shoot an airplane (unless, of course, you have the chance to shoot it air-to-air ;-). The only thing I find slightly disturbing is that white thing (runway marker?) near the landing gear. --El Grafo (talk) 09:35, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Kamthorn Phumhiran - Anupong Paochinda - Songkitti Chakkrabat.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 08:11:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Peerapat Wimolrungkarat - uploaded by User:2T - nominated by User:Simfan34 -- Simfan34 (talk) 08:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Simfan34 A brilliantly composed display of military regalia. (talk) 08:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but I see nothing "brilliantly composed". The three men do not look into the camera, the background with the crowd of people is also distracting. The "military regalia" which seem to be important here are very unsharp, also the faces are not sharp. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

image:Palma nana a Segesta.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 05:41:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by OppidumNissenae - uploaded by OppidumNissenae - nominated byOppidumNissenae-- OppidumNissenae (talk) 05:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- OppidumNissenae (talk) 05:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Large patches of white are blown out. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:26, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I are not able to make the correction of overexposure--OppidumNissenae (talk) 14:12, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:43, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paulskirche from Frankfurter Dom during Weihnachtsmarkt 2012.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 11:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Julia W - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 11:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 11:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad cut, bad light, poor depth, too much overexposure kills the contrast is poor. although the idea is good (even if the subject is not exciting) the image does not convey what the photographer wanted to convey.--Pava (talk) 12:30, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Pava. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:40, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 11:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:38, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gran Palacio, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 07.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 21:50:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Exterior columns and one of the four replica Borobodur-style Buddha images at the corner of The Library (Phra Mondop), building belonging to the Temple of the Emerald Buddha (Wat Phra Kaew), Bangkok, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 21:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 21:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Crop on the sides. Yann (talk) 13:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ok, understood, Poc o² 19:59, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Israel-2013-Jerusalem-Temple Mount-Dome of the Rock & Chain 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 19:39:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Godot13 (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image was previously nominated in May. I’ve fixed the color issues (there is nothing that can be done about the crop) and hope it is now FP material. -- Godot13 (talk) 19:39, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support now that the color was fixed. thanks for the work and dedication to the photo. --SuperJew (talk) 07:37, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 06:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 20:06, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not a thing wrong with this eminently photographable building. Daniel Case (talk) 02:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Painted Ladies San Francisco January 2013 panorama 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 09:45:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good composition, showing two different parts of the city nicely in the same picture. The difference in brightness between them adds to the composition imo. --Kadellar (talk) 10:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question It's a very nice view. As already pointed out by Kadellar the combination of old and new is well done here. Just a question: When I look on the photo the large white house at the very left is quite remarkable. Does it belong to the "Painted Ladies"? If not I would think about an alternative crop (see note) because it distracts from the real stars here - the Painted Ladies. BTW: At the very right there is an area which a a bit unsharp, but not that crucial. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In this classic view, the Painted Ladies are not the only stars - this also happens to be one of the best views of the San Francisco skyline. My purpose for the wide panorama is to include a broad view of the skyline. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:50, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then I would suggest to modify the filename and decription to something like "Painted Ladies with skyline of San Francisco..." --18:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure about this. I do like the contrast and lighting though agree the left of the image isn't as strong as the right. But cropping no longer has the panoramic background. I find the red car on the right very distracting in this photo (less so in the other version). I wonder if you would consider trying to clone it out or changing its colour (e.g., brown) -- it isn't technically part of the scene so I don't think doing so would be dishonest, especially if you covered it in the image description notes. -- Colin (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's too large to clone out, so I have desaturated it. Yeah, it's not really possible to include the entire skyline background behind the Painted Ladies; Alamo Square is on a hill, so if you try to walk closer to make the Painted Ladies seem bigger, the skyline disappears below the houses. I went with the best composition I could find. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 18:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tuxyso (talk) 18:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --Mathieudu68 (talk) 20:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC) Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. J Kadavoor J e e 05:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ArildV (talk) 21:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wow!!! Very impressive indeed. Perfect lighting. Well done.Fotoriety (talk) 23:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 00:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:23, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 06:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:55, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 16:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Panorama Cap des Mèdes.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 08:50:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created - uploaded - nominated by Prométhée33 (talk) 08:50, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Prométhée33 (talk) 08:50, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Heavy distortion (the horizon is not straight). --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:42, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tilt, loss of detail through NR/compression, clipped areas. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurred, tilt, CA -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:24, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distortion, tilt, white balance, seems blurred in some areas, composition a little awkward. Daniel Case (talk) 02:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per the above given comments.--M49314 (talk) 13:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tower Bridge (north side view).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 15:46:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by -- Bob Collowan (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowan (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This angle means the huge piers on which the bridge rests obscure the middle and furthers sections. The middle in particular is key as it is the section that can be raised. We have other featured images of the bridge from better angles and at higher resolution. One advantage of this angle is its horizontal compactness, which is probably why it has remained in the Wikipedia article infobox. -- Colin (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lulumall atrium.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 15:26:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Mail2arunjith - uploaded by Mail2arunjith - nominated by Benison P Baby -- Benison (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benison (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Below 2 MP. It has a strong blue cast (white balance!) --Tuxyso (talk) 15:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it has far less than 2 megapixels.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

— Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:24, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:BennyTrapp Pelophylax shquipericus Montenegro.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 19:03:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Benny Trapp - uploaded by Benny Trapp - nominated by Achim Raschka -- Achim Raschka (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:44, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saab JAS39 Gripen of the Czech Air Force.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 19:00:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Milan Nykodym - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- russavia (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the tilt is not making any good here, and I find the left crop too tight. --Kadellar (talk) 11:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:44, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pinus halepensis, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2013 at 10:45:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The tree isn't sufficiently isolated from its surrounds to make a great specimen, nor is the composition particularly interesting to achieve sufficient wow. The lighting is also quite hard. But what have you done to it in post? It looks like the image has been oversharpened. The fine twigs are twigs are jaggy with each pixel step and there's a pattern over the lower-left tree. There's so much colour noise dancing about the edge of the tree which mysteriously vanishes out in the sky. Have you turned off the colour noise reduction in Lightroom? The default of 25 (at least in my LR4) is usually required -- all digital photos have colour noise, even at iso 100, that needs suppressed. Have you painted over the sky with NR or blur -- it is hard to do this convincingly with an erratic outline. I suggest you try instead reducing sharpening considerably and using a bit of Lightroom's sharpening mask slider to avoid sharpening noise in the sky. When you adjust Lighrtoom's sharpening sliders, hold down Alt to get a black-and-white view that helps you visualise the effect better. -- Colin (talk) 11:49, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done New version with lighting less hard, none sharpening, none noise reduction in the sky, only "a bit of Lightroom's sharpening mask slider to avoid sharpening noise in the sky". Yes, first time I had turned off the colour noise reduction and also painted over the sky with NR. Anyway thanks for advices. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:40, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is better now, thanks. I'm still not going wow, sorry. But it is a quality/valued image and deservedly so. -- Colin (talk) 20:04, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I also see nothing excellent. -- -donald- (talk) 09:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fly-past Bastille Day 2013 Paris t115147.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 20:59:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Jastrow - nominated by Paris 16 (talk)
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 20:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice symmetry and blade movement. --Kadellar (talk) 11:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 13:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias), hunting.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 03:01:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nobody would want to be a small fish --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:49, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 08:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support It's good but this bird is a popular photographic subject so the required standard is higher imo. The bird's pose ideally wants more room to the right hand side. There are more interesting poses in the category, though often not of sufficient quality. I did find this spectacular shot, though I suspect it wouldn't pass FP as the slightly cropped wing and chroma noise would upset the nit-pickers :-). Colin (talk) 19:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:08, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Mono Lake South Tufa September 2013 012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 00:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:45, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 09:18, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:53, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- a little bit bleached --Neptuul (talk) 13:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition isn't saying wow to me, and it is a bit soft in the middle and distance as though the focus is set a little too close. There are several others in your recent uploads that are stronger compositions/images (though the headless bird one was unfortunate). Btw, with these long exposures, are you using an ND filter to smooth the water, or just taking the pictures in low light? -- Colin (talk) 19:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I used an 8-stop ND with a 2-stop grad on top here. But it all depends - for some of my pictures, as it got darker I used a 4-stop ND + 2-stop grad, and when it got really dark just a 2-stop grad. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:31, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support da hätte ich mir ein Panorama gewünscht :-) --Böhringer (talk) 21:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:11, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:White House north side.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2013 at 05:45:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose I don't like the tree in the foreground, it has covered the building. --Z 07:16, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question Was it your original intention to leave more than half of the building in shadow? The light is somehow interesting but I know that kind of lighting rather from portrayal photography than from architecture shots. Probably there is something you wished to accentuate I do currently not see. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, light generally is a difficult matter when it comes to taking pictures of the north facade of the White House. In this case I thought it was interesting since the sunlight crossed the portico diagonally. Even the fountain fits in. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, north facades of the Northern Hemisphere are things that can only be taken during the early morning or late afternoon of summer days. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 06:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Audi Sport quattro concept.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 18:51:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 18:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info World premiere of the concept car Audi Sport quattro concept at IAA 2013 in Frankfurt, Germany.
Support -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 18:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 15:08, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:38, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 11:54, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose light reflections bad (especially on the glass), the sensor could be used much better, cut to the right size completely the head of a man, the public and the depth of field did not take account of the public that neither was put completely in plan, nor is it in focus. The subject (this specific car) is not particularly exciting and is not quite original. Do not be distinguished from other. they are beautiful just the reflections in the dark opaque plastic, I think this model (this static reproduction of a car) they did in Turin, (Italy) PS: because there are a lot of votes without comment? It looks more like a "call to arms" that a discussion on the evaluation of the image.--Pava (talk) 12:40, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Karaköy Mars 2013 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 18:38:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info The ferry Barış Manço at Karaköy Iskelesi (jetty), Karaköy, Istanbul. In the background the Bosphorus and the Asian side. Photo taken from the Galata Bridge.
Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 18:45, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I feel the composition is a bit unbalanced and would benefit from a crop on the right. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done--ArildV (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment nice but the left is leaning in -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:48, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Thanks.--ArildV (talk) 12:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support good -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this one is not wow enough for me - imo the composition is being dominated not by the skyline of the Asian part (which is obscured to a big part), but by the ordinary buildings at the left --A.Savin 22:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per A.Savin, there's simply no wow there for me. russavia (talk) 19:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:13-08-08-hongkong-sky100-37.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 18:28:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hong Kong; View from Sky-100 to Hong Kong island

Info all by -- Ralf Roleček 18:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ralf Roleček 18:28, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment perspective issues, the left is leaning out -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- right, its corrected. --Ralf Roleček 21:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok for tilt, it's a nice image but can you try to reduce a bit the noise, especialy in the sky? -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- noise is reduced. --Ralf Roleček 10:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice contrast between blue-night and the lights of the town -- Christian Ferrer 11:06, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:36, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common Redshank Tringa totanus.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 16:34:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Andreas Trepte - uploaded by Andreas Trepte - nominated by Nikhil
Support -- Nikhil (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 06:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The quality is very good, but the crop is unfortunate. I would suggest to crop tighter at the right, leave some space at the left (direction of the view) and much more space on the top, see my proposal. Probably you can make an alternative nomination --Tuxyso (talk) 06:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose I agree with Tuxyso. --Z 07:21, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~ Oppose Over processing. (e.g. Posterization on the spikes.) --Laitche (talk) 10:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)--Laitche (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support not A1 sharpness, but nonetheless FP imo --A.Savin 22:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For a photo of a bird, I would expect to see the full bird in the photograph, this includes the feet -- it looks like this is a footless bird on a stump. So whilst the photo might be technically ok, there's simply no wow factor here. russavia (talk) 19:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Yosemite Park in Evening Backlight 2013 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 13:43:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by User:Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 13:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 13:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 18:42, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little darker than I'd prefer, but very good nonetheless. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 06:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Z 07:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the contrast and that the shadows haven't been lifted. Colin (talk)
Support --JLPC (talk) 14:01, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 14:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Very low optical quality at the corners. Sting (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That is normal border unsharpness of a ultra-wide-angle lens at 10mm. Even the most expensive wide-angle lens (the Nikon 14-24) has a certain amount of border unsharpness. This one is the AF-S 10-24 which is also not that bad. Most visibly at the top right corner which is imho not really a critical area for the overall statement of the photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - If lack of sharpness on the borders is acceptable or even searched in portraiture it's not desirable in landscape photography and this zoom lens shows blurred corners with deformations and CAs appearing. I suggest to crop these areas or use a dedicated lens correction software to reduce these effects. Sting (talk) 16:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I use standard lens correction from Lightroom (including CA correcture). Cropping would destroy the composition which is in the case here much more important than 100% sharpness (which has no lens at 10mm) to the corners. As previously stated (and just tested a few minutes ago): Even not the super expensive full format lens Nikon AF-S 14-24mm has 100% sharpness at the corners. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I totally hear you! ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't know LR but if it cannot do a better job, may be it's really too much for it. A spherical anamorphosis correction reduces partially the problems but in counterpart changes the visual of the picture. It's up to up but give it a try. Zoom lenses are compromises and a high price isn't at all a guarantee of optical quality. Nikon doesn't do better than Canon on this point. I've got one and consider it crap, not even worth half its price. I've got also a 17mm (sure, it's “only” a 17) but its sharpness and contrast is even from center to the extreme corners and doesn't show any distortion or CA in these last areas. But I agree, that's a prime lens and its price range isn't the same. Sting (talk) 17:33, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think part of the problem is the focus is too close and hasn't extended sufficiently (at f/5.6) to the hills. These lack sharpness at 100% even in the centre. Advice on hyperfocal distance may assume a relatively small print for viewing, rather than 100% on a 27" monitor! You're also unfortunate in having leaves and sharp rocks in the corner of your picture, rather than sky or shadow, so the defects are clear to see. For me, the composition and lighting is good enough to compensate, but I agree that technically the picture isn't perfect. -- Colin (talk) 10:38, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it's too dark for me and also per Sting. --Ivar (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark for me also. Kruusamägi (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too shady. Maybe a later hour (sunset) would have made it more pleasant, but so the wow is rather on the low side here. Technically well managed backlit, that's all. --A.Savin 22:28, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark. -- -donald- (talk) 07:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately I have to agree with the other opposers, it is is too dark. Dark photos could be FP too of course, but in this composition it doesn't kick me, sorry. --LC-de (talk) 10:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support not too dark, nice atmosphere! -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 14:44, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin. --Laitche (talk) 20:08, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info I've uploaded an alternative with +brightness and a slightly tighter crop. I still prefer the original nomination because it reflects imho the mood better than this one. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with you Tuxyso, this looks unnaturally bright. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No longer "evening backlight". And the squarer aspect doesn't work as well. -- Colin (talk) 10:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lee Fields & The Expressions (Haldern Pop 2013) IMGP3844 smial wp.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 13:12:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Smial - uploaded by Smial - nominated by me. Julian Herzog
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 13:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 13:29, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 18:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:37, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- very good shot Achim Raschka (talk) 09:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool pic. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 02:58, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 15:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Kleiner Fuchs (Nymphalis urticae).jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2013 at 07:38:42

Info Too small, and left wing is out of focus. (Original nomination)
Delist -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 09:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:13, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist J Kadavoor J e e 03:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral 7 years. Poor bird. Darkone 11:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Kadellar (talk) 11:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 7 delist, 0 keep, 1 neutral => delisted. JKadavoor Jee 08:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chaimarrornis leucocephalus 1 - Doi Inthanon.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 14:05:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 14:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 14:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 19:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:47, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 09:42, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:34, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Friends Arena and Quality Hotel Friends October 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2013 at 18:38:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Friends Arena and the new Quality Hotel Friends at night, seen from Frösunda. . Created, uploadedand nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 18:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 18:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The building is not entirely straight. Contrast can also be boosted a bit. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Thanks.--ArildV (talk) 22:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:15, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:50, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good, noise is well managed. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:59, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:25, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 04:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Nazaré February 2013-12.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 19:57:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info The beach and village of Nazaré, west coast of Portugal. It was a sunny winter afternoon and a lot of people was walking along the promenade bordering the beach. Some weeks ago, Garrett MacNamara had surfed a record wave of over 30 meters, to the left of the lighthouse. That is a unique place for large waves because of the submarine canyon coming very near the promontory. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice wide-angle view. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Loads of detail on the cliffs and the town. -- Colin (talk) 11:50, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:25, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 07:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:48, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 18:15, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 06:27, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:14, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 19:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:42, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Holtug Kirke (Stevns Kommune, Danmark).JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2013 at 16:28:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by -- Bob Collowan (talk) 16:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowan (talk) 16:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support As already written on the previous nomination: Great interplay of colors and nice composition (especially the framing by the tree and its leafs) --Tuxyso (talk) 21:31, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 04:57, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:23, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:47, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 16:50, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ I don't want to spoil the party, but imo the picture is oversaturated. The colors just don't appear natural... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:13, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for your comment. I've decreased vibrance (-4) and saturation (-4) with Camera Raw, and the colors look natural to me now, taking into account that the picture was taken on a sunny summer day. -- Bob Collowan (talk) 10:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support much better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:16, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 20:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 05:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Beach, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2013 at 17:19:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:18, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak Support Nice view and good quality, but image needs some more contrast IMO. -- MJJR (talk) 09:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done New version contrsted and tint less purple -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Normally I might suggest cropping the village out at the bottom to focus more clearly on the beach. But in this image we benefit from seeing the geographical relationship between the village and the beach. I also like the way the rectilinearity of the buildings and the lines of the fields contrast with the irregular fractality of the beach. Daniel Case (talk) 17:42, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for opinions and supports but colors and background are not the best, I will return at this place to take a better quality image of the same composition -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jaur and Orb Valleys, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2013 at 11:56:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:56, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:56, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 10:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are strong CAs at the front on the rocks (imho fixable). You have overexposure on the sky - (99%, 99%, 99%) RGB values (all channels have the same value) which points on a typical result from highlight correction. If you have really burnt hightlights and you correct e.g. in Lightroom, you cannot repair these areas but only make the 100% white a bit more gray. The level of detail is good, your notes are valuable. But even after fixing the CAs I see nothing FP special with it for a landscape shot. The light is average the composition not eye-catching. You tried to frame the photo with foreground elements which is good, but the elements there look too disorganized to recognize a clear compositional idea. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done for CAs ,thanks -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:06, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with most of what Tuxyso mentioned. Mostly, I don't like the light here. At a low angle, light could create contrast here, but it actually decreases contrast in this scene. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:53, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Both are right, the place deserves better, I should return later, thanks for opinions -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mono Lake South Tufa September 2013 007.jpg, not featured (withdrawn)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2013 at 22:57:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak oppose It looks nice, for sure. What a motive! I wished the foreground had been brighter or in sunlight. But I am missing a compositional idea (some diagonals, eye-catching elements or interesting segmentation of the space), e.g. as it is very well done on your beautiful photo File:Mono Lake South Tufa September 2013 010.jpg . The red mountains in the background looks nice, but there is no photographic interrelationship between foreground (stone formation) and background. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:00, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also weak oppose: The background without this foreground might be FP, but this foreground subject is interesting through its shape, and the third dimension is almost completely lost as a result of ambient-only lighting. It just needs a key light of some kind imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:00, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:20, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 04:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:2 x Saab JAS-39 Gripen and 2 x Aero L-159 of the Czech Air Force, based at AFB Čáslav, inflight.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 19:07:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Milan Nykodym - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 19:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- russavia (talk) 19:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --Mathieudu68 (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC) Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. J Kadavoor J e e 05:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have a hard time believing that this isn't fake. The planes do not fly in parallel, so they would move relative to each other rather quickly. But everything is totally sharp, even though the exposure time is only 1/250. Plus I see no heat blur behind the engines, and, judging by the angle, they are just about to collide. --Kabelleger (talk) 19:54, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree. They might very well fly in parallel to each other, a Gripen has to fly at a far higher angle of attack than a L-159 at low speed. For this photo flight, the speed was probably near the bottom of the Gripen's flight envelope. Slat and canard position also indicate a high AOA. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 08:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Surely looks a bit odd. But have a look at this shot, taken 2 seconds later: The two L-159 were indeed coming very close (probably in order to get a good shot) and then broke off to avoid collision. Still looks "wrong", so even though I don't think it's a fake I won't give a support. --El Grafo (talk) 09:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's nothing fake about these photos. One look at his Flickr stream will tell you that he is just an amazing photographer. As noted by El Grafo, here is another photo 2 seconds later, and if one looks the photographer states how it is he got these photos. russavia (talk) 03:07, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Mono 20:28, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:05, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 10:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support although I have a difficulty to choose which is the best. Most frames look competitive to each other. J Kadavoor J e e 15:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Porsche 918 Spyder IAA 2013 Heckansicht rechts.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2013 at 16:17:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 16:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald (keb) 16:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I saw this in QI and thought about nominating it here, very nice photo. Two things worried me: The ground on the bottom right is clipped. I think it would be better if it was only almost clipped. More importantly though, the white ground has reduced the contrast the lens produced in the lower part of the photo, which is why I think the contrast of the lower third (approximately) should be increased so that the black point is correct in these areas (and consistent with the contrast in the center of the image). — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 16:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose shadow truncated very bad, bad cut, screen, bad contrast and the screen and the screen in my infringes any copyright, ugly reflections and ugly brightness of the white parts, you can even see the legs of the photographer on the plate. not Good --Pava (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus), Corte Madera.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 23:17:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. Very, very lovely. Due to the heavy NR, the quality is a bit lower than I'd usually want, but the "wow" factor more than makes up for it. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My wife thinks that bird pictures are boring and urges me to go back to landscape. With this photo, I kinda wanted to make a point. When I showed it to her, she said "Wow!" ;-) I'm glad you like it too. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Royalbroil 05:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barcex (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:53, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, I've uploaded a version with sharper bird and less noise in water, revert if you don't like --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Your version is a bit oversharpened, better revert imo. --Laitche (talk) 12:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is one of my defects, maybe I shall have to abstain of sharpening the bird, if Frank ask me, I will do the same without sharpening of the bird --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Reverted on original version as asked by Colin on my talk page, no problem, sorry --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice minimalistic composition. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Original. --Laitche (talk) 15:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Original but not the altered one. -- Colin (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 18:56, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achim Raschka (talk) 19:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Frank, I appreciate your wife's reviewing skills. :) J Kadavoor J e e 16:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --M49314 (talk) 13:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Whilst a "nice" image, having a bird reflected in the water just isn't enough "WOW" to make up for the overall image quality issues. russavia (talk) 14:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eligible for 5 day speedy close, but one oppose now; so leaving it to the decision of others. J Kadavoor J e e 15:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:2011-05-31-praha-metro-by-RalfR-29.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 17:16:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Můstek, metro station of A line in Prague

Info all by -- Ralf Roleček 17:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ralf Roleček 17:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's potential in the is scene. Possibly a black-and-white treatment would work well? However, the depth of focus too slim plus some camera shake. As an aside, I think the Můstek station is much more photographic pointing the camera in the other direction -- lovely dimpled walls. The other photos you took show this. For example, File:2011-05-31-praha-metro-by-RalfR-28.jpg shows potential for an abstract on the right-hand-side of the image, but also suffers from camera shake and lens wide-open. -- Colin (talk) 18:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I shall have preferred a centring more to the left because it is the most interesting part, I suggest you a crop (see note) Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lights are very bad, the sensor has not done a good job --Pava (talk) 12:25, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 17:48, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paris - Sacré-Cœur - Kuppel zur blauen Stunde.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 12:22:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw. Image was already nominated here and was well accepted, but sadly there was to less voters. As I think this image is worth to be FP I start a renomination. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 12:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 12:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 14:47, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the overlapping-dome composition. There are better composition arrangements in Category:Dome of Basilique du Sacré-Cœur de Montmartre. The building to the front-right looks good and natural, but the rear dome and the building to the front left have too much local contrast. This might be unfortunate lighting but might also be overprocessing. Either way, the rear dome is blown in places so there is no detail to the brickwork. The contrast between the blown yellow-lit brickwork and the saturated blue sky makes the picture look less real. The top of the dome is blurred, though I appreciate it is quite some way away -- I can't comment on whether the aperture could have been smaller as there's no EXIF data. Which is another issue: the file has no colour profile defined or embedded, so may appear different colours on everyone's PC or mac. I think an FP should have professional standards here, and so expect an sRGB profile for web usage. Any quality program designed for editing photographs should be able to save JPGs properly with a suitable profile. -- Colin (talk) 18:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad cut penalize the compositions, the subject is not very exciting, is something already seen in many other parts of the world. bad depth --Pava (talk) 12:27, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Joydeep _Talk 12:44, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Deep Purple - MN Gredos - 08.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 11:50:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Steve Morse (Deep Purple) performing at Músicos en la naturaleza 2013 in Hoyos del Espino, Ávila, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 11:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 11:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:42, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Barcex (talk) 12:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 20:05, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 03:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Royalbroil 05:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you all you five for your support. For others, Come on! I think this fits into Category:Featured pictures of concerts. I really think it is one of the best pictures I've ever made, much more difficult than the freestyle rider one already featured, and imo much better than my other two concert FPs. Good lighting and sharpness and more dynamic. Why is it so difficult to have concert images reviewed? Thanks! --Kadellar (talk) 11:43, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:39, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's really no wow factor here for me, sure it's a quality photo, but it's simply not WOW! The bottom crop giving up a half-legless guitarist also doesn't sit well with me -- often their stance can add to the wow, and this is only evident if the entire body is present. russavia (talk) 20:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good lighting, composition and exposure. Overall, very good image quality and (at least for me) definitely wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you very much to you all for your support. Thanks Russavia for your review. --Kadellar (talk) 10:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 12:43, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:White bison by N A Nazeer.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2013 at 10:00:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by en:N. A. Naseer - uploaded by Manojk - nominated by User:കാർത്തുമ്പി -- കാർത്തുമ്പി (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very rare photograph-- കാർത്തുമ്പി (talk) 10:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Vinayaraj (talk) 04:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Irvin calicut (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy, lack of detail. --Joydeep _Talk 17:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose VERY noisy, grainy and unsharp. --Kadellar (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Too noisy. Mathieudu68 (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC) Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. J Kadavoor J e e 05:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Info I nominated this photo not because it is very good quality, but because this picture was claimed as the "First clear Photographic evidence of white bison after seventy years" --കാർത്തുമ്പി (talk) 08:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support--മനോജ്.കെ|Manoj. K (Talk) 15:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Subject, composition and colors are outstanding, regarding the sharpness the picture seems upsampled. --Ras67 (talk) 02:44, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy, but the image is a good candidate for Valued images --Sreejith K (talk) 04:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Sreejith. Not a quality scan (?), I afraid. J Kadavoor J e e 06:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality is not sufficient. Looks very strange. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:05, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 12:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Indian V2 ioe.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2013 at 15:35:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created - uploaded and nominated by Qflieger

This is a V-Twin with an inlet over exhaust (ioe) valvedrive common to early motorcycles like this 1914 built Indian -- Qflieger (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Qflieger (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Leckner See, Hittisau 10.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2013 at 10:08:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Leckner See, Hittisau c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 10:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 10:08, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good quality and I like the new snow. Could you please add a English description?--ArildV (talk) 10:29, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Böhringer (talk) 15:23, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Laitche (talk) 19:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! --Plani (talk) 12:59, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:27, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:27, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 09:29, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poc o² 21:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support J Kadavoor J e e 02:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:US Capitol east side.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2013 at 20:40:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by myself. -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is the first time for me to renominate a formerly unsuccessful FP candidate. But I definitely want to give it another try, considering that the image had already gathered six supporting votes with only one vote opposing. I really like this photo. The circumstances of the shot were not easy at all, and I'm quite happy with the result. So.... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I change my vote, (I hope not too late) because the things I had taken for artifacts are not artifacts, It's details of the buldings and I've just seen its on others pictures of the same bulding yet I have searched the first time, really sorry -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would you remove the dust spot on the sky(top-left). --Laitche (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 18:07, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like it still very good --Böhringer (talk) 21:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support J Kadavoor J e e 16:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 13:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 20:17, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 02:58, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Großer Kohlweißling saugend.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2013 at 17:32:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created - uploaded and nominated by -- Qflieger (talk) 17:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Qflieger (talk) 17:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the butterfly is a bit overexposed and the background is bit-mapped -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:49, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same opinion --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 03:19, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Punkevni jeskynie01(js).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2013 at 11:57:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Jerzystrzelecki - uploaded by Jerzystrzelecki - nominated by Jerzystrzelecki -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 11:26, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 11:26, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice at low resolution but blurred and noisy at full IMO -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the composition and lighting but alas I agree with Christian. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /J Kadavoor J e e 16:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Templo Wat Arun, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 12.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2013 at 20:03:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info View of the steep climb to the Wat Arun Temple with the Chao Phraya river and the city of Bangkok in the background, Thailand. All by me, Poc o² 20:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poc o² 20:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Joydeep _Talk 12:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I love the picture but there is a lot of distortion near the edges and noise in the darker areas. Sorry! --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Let me comment on that. The issue you mention is the tradeoff of using a wide angle objective with the purpose to make the viewer have the impression that they are "inside" the picture. I can correct that problem but that would mean that I either loose a lot of image in the bottom or have to distort the picture heavily. I don't like either of those options but of course respect your opinion and vote. Poc o² 09:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poc o² 20:38, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Travaux-forum-des-Halles-2011-18.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2013 at 15:34:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Celette - nominated by Prince des élégances --Prince des élégances (talk) 15:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wow! --Yikrazuul (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Astonished! --Laitche (talk) 22:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: neither the subject nor its presentation are interesting in any way.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

— Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 18:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]