Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 13 2020

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Consensual review[edit]

File:Tallinn_Landmarks_11.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Wall Tower and St Nicolas Church Steeple in Tallinn --Scotch Mist 07:23, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose The wall is underexposed. Tower and wall are too unsharp. The lighting was unsuitable for this object. --Augustgeyler 11:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment To paraphrase 'out of darkness comes light' which I consider appropriate both to this photograph and hopefully to your broader appreciation of the work of others - am happy to accept the opinions of others here in QI consensual review and you are of course entitled to your opinion as to what lighting is suitable for a particular photo but it is disappointing that you persistently feel obliged to impose a seemingly quite limited personal appreciation\style\taste in this forum --Scotch Mist 06:56, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Please do not judge my taste as limited! All I do is trying to check images by comapring them to the rules. And as this image states to be about the wall and its tower, we should be able to see an image which has an exposure optimized to the wall and not to the light sky. --Augustgeyler 10:11, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment The primary 'subject' of the photo, as described, is the "Wall Tower" (not the wall per se) and the "Church Steeple" - the base of the wall of course is 'in the shade' but imho this forms an interesting contrast and is complementary to the top of the tower and the steeple - as long as you persist in apparently judging photos on the basis that every pixel, even of secondary and background subjects, must be ideally optimized for sharpness and brightness (but colours muted) then I will consider such an opinion limited in a creative photographic sense, but this is imho:!) --Scotch Mist 14:55, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment You say I "[...] persist in apparently judging photos on the basis that every pixel, even of secondary and background subjects [...]" This is not true. I expect you to not repead such untrue assertions about the way I review. I took the time to carefully review your nomination and I am now very surprised about your reaction. --Augustgeyler 17:05, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Dear Scotch Mist, I am sorry. Today I re-checked your nomination and found out that I had accidentality switched my calibrated monitor to a non-standard colour model. Tower and wall appeared to be at 90% black. But all these supporting votes made me wonder. When I checked it again (long back in sRGB-Mode) I saw your well exposed image. Again, I'm sorry for all the inconvenience I did cause by this. --Augustgeyler 09:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Fully understand that these things can happen and appreciate you taking another look!:) --Scotch Mist 10:06, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Nice composition. The darker parts are perfectly readable besides some smaller areas in the steeple --Moroder 05:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I don't like the composition of the tower behind and partially blocked by the other tower as much as you do, but I respect the photographer's artistic license. Good enough quality, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 06:01, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Ikan. --Smial 13:46, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Jakubhal 17:01, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 14:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

File:Staircase_National_Gallery_of_Slovenia.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination staircase National Gallery of Slovenia, Ljubljana --PetarM 17:37, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  I withdraw my support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 19:51, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Distorted perspective and unsharp at edges. The picture already was nominated and declined few days ago, no new version uploaded since then, so what's the point in re-nominating, please? --A.Savin 01:31, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @A.Savin: I accidentally oversaw that. I thought I could see this by checking for a category like rejected images for QI. But there was non. Otherwise it would be impossible to check all the archives to find something like this. Can you tell me how to detect this in the future? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Augustgeyler (talk • contribs)
  • The question was addressed to the nominator (PetarM). Of course you cannot expect from every reviewer to remember all previously declined nominations. But yes it is possible to check this, by looking if the file is being used on a QIC archive page. --A.Savin 13:21, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose With A.Savin --Augustgeyler 01:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 10:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)