Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 12 2021

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Close_wing_nectaring_position_of_Eurema_hecabe_–_Common_Grass_Yellow.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Close wing nectaring position of Eurema hecabe – Common Grass Yellow. (by Sarpitabose) --Atudu 07:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Kritzolina 08:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose Not QI for me. Not enough sharp, head not in focus. Alexander Novikov 14:28, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Alexander. --Smial 10:28, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Alexander. -- Ikan Kekek 10:12, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too much blurring on the head. --Steindy 10:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 13:03, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Champakulam_St._Mary's_Basilica1.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Champakulam Kallorkadu St. Marys's Basilica. By User:T M Cyriac --Bodhisattwa 04:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Sorry. IMO the depth of field is too small: the front and back of the church are out of focus. --Carsten Steger 06:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good Quality image --Gnoeee 09:40, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Given the size of the church, the quality is good enough. --Tagooty 09:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
 Comment Dust spot to remove. --Steindy 20:18, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unsharp, too tight crop. -- Alvesgaspar 23:07, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Lacks sharpness.--Ermell 13:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective correction is needed (tilt to the left). --F. Riedelio 06:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Steindy 00:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Ortenburg_-_Sammarei_44_-_Pfarrhaus.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination The rectory in Sammarei, Ortenburg. --Mosbatho 18:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Halavar 18:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, it's too dark... --Tournasol7 05:50, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Is it an oppose ? If no vote, no CR !--Jebulon 10:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Please see "Consensual review", rules section: an oppose is assumed unless stated otherwise. :) --Peulle 11:02, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Tournasol7 but it may be fixable. --GRDN711 12:33, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support For me it's okay. Good quality. --Steindy 19:46, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Ok for me. I do not think it's too dark. --Hillopo2018 08:16, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Considering how dark the sky is, I think this could be unrealistically darkened. What time of day in what month was this photo shot? -- Ikan Kekek 20:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose underexposed. --Kallerna 05:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support The photo is sharp, perspective is ok, the sky is a little bit dark but it's good quality overall for me. --Sebring12Hrs 05:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Sebring12Hrs. --Zinnmann 07:28, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Underexposed, probably very easily fixable. --Trougnouf 18:52, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Trougnof and others. Date and time should be put in the Summary since EXIF is missing. --Tagooty 03:25, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective correction is needed (left side tilt to the right), no metadata, roof and sky too dark, unfavorable image composition (right side should be cropped). --F. Riedelio 06:53, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Declined   --Steindy 00:31, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Mute_swan_in_the_Semois_river_(DSC_8387).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Mute swan (Cygnus olor) flapping its wings in the Semois river (Bouillon, Belgium) --Trougnouf 08:02, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Can you reduce the noise (especially in the dark part)? --Steindy 08:46, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done, thank you for reviewing --Trougnouf 09:41, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, the noise is too much. --Steindy 19:21, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • I think it's acceptable, though I'm happy to denoise specific areas more. --Trougnouf 10:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I've applied stronger denoising --Trougnouf 17:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Very good --Moroder 02:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Okay now. --Steindy 17:20, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Pretty swan, bright light but OK. Nice photo overall. -- Ikan Kekek 20:31, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose much tighter crop needed. --Kallerna 05:24, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Kallerna: Can you make an alternative version of your preferred crop with the lossless CropTool? I'm keeping this one as the nomination but I agree that an alternative crop would be nice. --Trougnouf 08:10, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Just crop a lot more. Now most of the photo is just background. --Kallerna 15:46, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Nice quality. NightWolf1223 19:27, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good. --Aristeas 08:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Steindy 00:29, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Arot_DSCF2278.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination L'Arot dans le vallon de l'Ar à Germiny en Meurthe-et-Moselle. --Musicaline 18:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose unfavorable color balance; probably the exposure time was too long here --Hillopo2018 08:51, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Color balace looks ok. The sky may be a bit overexposed, but acceptable IMHO. --C messier 15:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
  • If you dial down the highlights, I will be able to support. -- Ikan Kekek 05:10, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support acceptable for QI, IMO.--Jebulon 20:19, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Jebulon --Moroder 02:32, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Composition is an important component of image quality. And this one is not good enough -- Alvesgaspar 23:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Alvesgaspar + needs english description. --Kallerna 05:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Jebulon. As far as I know an English description might be nice, but it is not required. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:47, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Commonists 19:11, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. --Palauenc05 11:50, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
  • The top-right is a bit overexposed, I would support with a bit of a crop of the right but I am totally  Neutral as it is. --Trougnouf 18:49, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 Comment @Trougnouf: Good idea, I cropped a bit. It also allowed me to remove the bottom of the tree on the right which I found disturbing. Thank you. Musicaline 04:18, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Looks great :) --Trougnouf 08:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good now. --Aristeas 08:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 7 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Steindy 00:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)