Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 04 2018

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Rundläuferpresse_an_der_Uni_Tübingen,_in_Betrieb_04.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Rotary press in operation --Brackenheim 22:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. Frank Schulenburg Sun, 29 Apr 2018 22:41:50 GMT
  •  OpposeLacks sharpness. Sorry. --Ermell 06:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose DoF is a few milimeters in front of the press and the pill and I think overall too small. --Granada 07:07, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ermell and Granada. If only the pill in the centre was sharp... --Basotxerri (talk) 07:59, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 15:59, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Lotus_Esprit_Turbo_S3,_Special_Edition_1983_(2018-04-29_Sp).JPG[edit]

@The Photographer: The background and the people in the picture are purposely set in the slight blur to better highlight the object, the Lotus sports car. I do not understand that this is criticized. -- Spurzem 20:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Background blur is not enough how I told on my first vote, the background is too prominent and disturbing, IMHO. --The Photographer 00:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Granada: Laughable! Here is not FP or KEB. Or could you explain why it should not allowed to present the side view of a car? -- Spurzem 07:57, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination Aufgrund vieler Erfahrungen hätte ich wissen müssen: Ein von Spurzem gemachtes Foto ist grundsätzlich schlecht; ich ziehe die Nominierung zurück. -- Spurzem 07:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Basotxerri 16:08, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hidroavión_aterrizando_en_Vancouver,_Canadá,_2017-08-14,_DD_36.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Float plane (C-CGVNL) landing in Vancouver, Canada --Poco a poco 07:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. The Photographer Sat, 28 Apr 2018 17:04:35 GMT
  • Doesn't look so bad to me. I've uploaded a new version, though. IMHO a QI now, please, let's discuss Poco a poco Mon, 30 Apr 2018 18:08:51 GMT
  •  Weak oppose The main subject is the plane but as it's within a sort of landscape scenery I wish that at least the elements in the middle layer were sharper. --Basotxerri (talk) 07:53, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The gas station is o.k but the rest is too blurry.--Ermell 08:31, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose insufficient quality--Fischer.H 17:44, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 19:53, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Abandoned_house_in_Doel,_Belgium_(DSCF3895-3897).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Abandoned house in Doel, Belgium --Trougnouf 11:31, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Underexposed The Photographer Sat, 28 Apr 2018 16:46:39 GMT
  • ✓ Done brighter version uploaded --Trougnouf 21:38, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality with the brighter version --PJDespa 10:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose insufficient quality --Fischer.H 17:31, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose to me still too dark --Granada 09:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 15:57, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Decorated_abandoned_house_in_Doel,_Belgium_(DSCF3804).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Decorated abandoned house in Doel, Belgium --Trougnouf 11:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose The house is in the shadows and top elements are distracting The Photographer Thu, 26 Apr 2018 01:37:47 GMT
  •  Comment Are the power lines the distracting elements? I don't mind this picture being declined, but I think shadows are acceptable as long as they are not so hard as to cause loss of details. I'd like another opinion / reason. --Trougnouf 18:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The overwhelming shadows make it quiet difficult to make under this circumstances a good photo; the light differences between the sunny and shadowed parts are too large to make a good balanced photo. Small shadowed parts are generally not a problem, but in this case it's better to talk about small sunny parts and generally that does not give a possible Q1photo. This might be a Q1composition one hour before the sun is going down --Michielverbeek 06:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support good managment of the light, shadows are not so disturbing IMO --Christian Ferrer 18:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Having so much of the house in shadow is not ideal, but can't we tolerate shadows? I don't think they're the implacable enemy of good photography. And otherwise, the motif and composition are good. -- Ikan Kekek 02:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose If the main subject would be the shadows...then ok, but it isn't, they are too predominant versus the building and therefore a relevant issue for QI Poco a poco 08:40, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 15:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)