Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 04 2019

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Absberg_Kellergasse_51.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Objekt in der Kellergasse in Absberg (Niederösterreich). --Manfred Kuzel 06:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:28, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
     Oppose I disagree. Patterns here as well. --Ermell 21:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 09:54, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Absberg_Kellergasse_49.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Objekt in der Kellergasse in Absberg (Niederösterreich). --Manfred Kuzel 06:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:28, 24 November 2019 (UTC)}
     Oppose I disagree. Patterns at the door in the shadow areas. --Ermell 21:46, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 09:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Johanneskirken,_Bergen,_Noruega,_2019-09-08,_DD_75-77_HDR.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Johanneskirken, Bergen, Norway --Poco a poco 18:55, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Support Good quality --Michielverbeek 21:09, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry! I disagree. Too much noise for me, also the left window is outblown. --Steindy 22:48, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 07:43, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Johanneskirken,_Bergen,_Noruega,_2019-09-08,_DD_78-80_HDR.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Johanneskirken, Bergen, Norway --Poco a poco 18:55, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose Sorry! Too much noise. --Steindy 22:49, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Looks acceptable to me for a church where tripods are not welcome --Poco a poco 12:45, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Question Where do you get that from? I hear this for the first time. Here you can also use the flash. --Steindy 19:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 07:42, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

File:OIFF_2015-07-14_122523_-_Esther_Garrel.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Esther Garrel. By User:Amakuha --Andrew J.Kurbiko 08:11, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:56, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
     Oppose Sorry! I disagree. Too much noise. --Steindy 14:47, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Obviously low light situation, rather low noise regarding ISO1600, perfect focus, thankfully no blurring noise reduction and no oversharpening. --Smial 15:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support per Smial. --Aristeas 06:58, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry guys, but the extensive noise ruins the image. Alvesgaspar 07:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - And not really sharp enough. -- Ikan Kekek 09:58, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

* Support not signed Charlesjsharp 10:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)The eyes are not razor sharp, but this is only noticeable when viewing at 100%. Noise looks acceptable even at 100% (and no real user is going to be sitting so close to an image inflated to such a size that individual pixels are discernible, other than us reviewers). The subject is cleanly separated from the background and the exposure is good. It's a nice environmental portrait.

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 07:41, 3 December 2019 (UTC)