Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 05 2017

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Wandelen over de Planken Wambuis vanuit Mossel 025.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Walking the Planken Wambuis from Mossel. Sun goes down. --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, colors are not there, image is dark, and the crop is terrible, sorry --Basile Morin 01:23, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The crop is very unfortunate, indeed, sorry. --Basotxerri 08:54, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 16:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Neutrino Sculpture, Royal Botanic Gardens, Melbourne 2017-10-28.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Neutrino Sculpture, Royal Botanic Gardens, Melbourne Crisco 1492 12:51, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 13:27, 29 November 2017 (UTC)--Jacek Halicki 19:35, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Photo has some problems. Please look to the notes.--Aeou 13:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but the image looks like it was badly stitched together from at least two images. --Granada 13:55, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Granada.--Peulle 13:16, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Granada. -- Ikan Kekek 06:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:19, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Atalaya,_Llumés,_Zaragoza,_España,_2017-05-25,_DD_03.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Watchtower of Llumés, Saragossa, Spain --Poco a poco 07:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry: love the composition, but the watchtower looks unsharp (specially at the top) and with some halos --Rafesmar 18:51, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Agree, not the sharpest, but the version I just uploaded should be good to go, please, let's discuss --Poco a poco 19:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support--Jacek Halicki 19:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support That's better... --Rafesmar 14:54, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Ikan Kekek 06:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 11:19, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Ganga_Aarti,_Varanasi.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination A priest performs Ganga Aarti at Daswasamedha ghat in Varanasi. --Dey.sandip 06:18, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose An interesting composition, but unfortunately too noisy --Michielverbeek 07:30, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Given the challenging light conditions, I believe this much of noise should be acceptable. Let's get other opinions. -- Dey.sandip 08:18, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Michiel. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:14, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - IMO, the smokey noise is acceptable, as Dey.sandip says, and the composition is indeed quite interesting, as Michiel says. -- Ikan Kekek 07:02, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Really noisy, sorry. Good photo, but not a QI -- Basile Morin 11:34, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 16:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:New Albany City Hall 1.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination New Albany City Hall -- Sixflashphoto 00:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, perspective problems --Jacek Halicki 00:10, 30 November 2017 (UTC)--Jacek Halicki 17:18, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Where so? I need the constructive criticism but don't see it. -- Sixflashphoto 01:06, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment See my notes. --Jacek Halicki 10:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Version with new changes uploaded -- Sixflashphoto 17:11, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 11:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Blue_and_yellow_macaw_eating_a_peanut.webm

[edit]

  • Nomination A captive blue and yellow macaw, Ara ararauna, shells and eats a peanut using its beak and claws. --Grendelkhan 23:37, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment Not sure if videos can be quality images... In any case, videos should be horizontal --Rafesmar 22:36, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No problem with the eligibility, but the composition is a problem for me. Since the subject is the bird eating a nut, filming it from this above angle doesn't actually show much of the bird eating. A lower angle would have been a better choice.--Peulle 11:29, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree with the composition issues: besides the problems with the point of view, the vertical orientation makes the parrot look slightly cramped and most of the time the space above and below the bird is wasted.
    And maybe I am old-school, but I don't agree about vertical videos being considered quality videos. Video (unlike photography, that is "device-agnostic") is created to be consumed in horizontal devices, so the vertical orientation doesn't look right.--Rafesmar (talk) 13:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose, because of whatever that out-of-focus thing is in the lower left corner. -- Ikan Kekek 07:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:View from Capitoline Hill.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination View over Rome from the Capitoline Hill (NW) --Rabax63 17:35, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. PumpkinSky 20:46, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  OpposeClouds on the right side are overexposed --Jacek Halicki 19:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Blown highlights and artefacts in the sky.--Ermell 14:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Exposure of the initial version was ok. Rework led to color channel clipping in bright areas. Heavy noise reduction produced banding in the sky and loss of detail in other areas. I did not look for stitching errors etc., but suggest a rework without exposure "enhancements" and without brutal noise reduction. --Smial 15:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Changed Version uploaded. --Rabax63 17:47, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   ----PumpkinSky 20:41, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

File:The Wagnalls Memorial 1.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination The Wagnalls Memorial -- Sixflashphoto 00:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. PumpkinSky 00:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sharpness is poor --Jacek Halicki 19:37, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment New version uploaded -- Sixflashphoto 06:52, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose still not sharp enough.--Ermell 14:46, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 Comment Sharpness Changed, Noise in sky somewhat masked. -- Sixflashphoto 01:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Still too unsharp for QI, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 07:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:21, 4 December 2017 (UTC)