Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2015

< Commons:Featured picture candidates | Log
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 13:17:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Andrew the Apostle Cathedral in Pitsunda, Gagra District, Abkhazia.
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:22, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 15:54:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Ida chain and Messara plain from Phaistos
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Wikimedia Conference 2015 photo by Pine - 12.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 19:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior courtyard of a palace in Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 13:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seated Golden Buddha from Guhwang-dong, Gyeongju
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2015 at 21:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View on Hochwilde (3480m), a mountain of the Ötztal Alps photographed from a trail near Lazinser Alm inside the Texelgruppe Nature Park
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Admiralty Arch at Dusk, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 09:41:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Admiralty Arch at dusk
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 07:43:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Horndal iron works.
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:08, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 15:00:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Oppose as a consequence. — Julian H.✈ 06:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:St Raphael's Interior 1, Kingston, Surrey, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 09:37:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Raphael's, Kingston
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:12, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2015 at 05:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Xian, China: Cultural show
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:07, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 19:18:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The tunnel of Cotefablo is a public traffic tunnel located between Broto and Biescas, in Aragon, not far from the Pyrenees, Spain. The tunnel is 683 m long and was constructed in 1935. It was the scenario of a famous tragic accident during the 1989 Vuelta a España, causing that the brilliant 30-year-old german cyclist, Reimund Dietzen, retired from active sport due to the crash.
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 04:39, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 15:44:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wessel Couzijn (1980)
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 04:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 21:20:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Geological map of Italy, 1844
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 12:27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Maps

File:Basilica of San Vitale - Lamb of God mosaic.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 12:29:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lamb of God mosaic in presbytery of Basilica of San Vitale (built A.D. 547) Ravenna, Italy. UNESCO World heritage site.
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:33, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 14:29:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
I'm sorry to hear this, my thoughts are with him/her. Maybe a carefull rewiewer like @Laitche: can say its opinion on the last version. -- Christian Ferrer 08:42, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Christian why me... but OK. I can say a sharp is a sharp so cannot increase the details, as far as I see the last version, sharpness is better but not so big improving and a little bit loss details and also a little bit gain noises so overall I cannot say which is better... But in this case I think they should respect creator's intention, just my opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Laitche: why you? because I know you're always try to be picky, and I thank you for that! You confirms here what I suspected this is not really a real improvement so I reverted, this image can not be more sharpened without overprocessing so it's better to keep the first version which is not unsharp, thank you again for your contribution :). -- Christian Ferrer 21:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Picky!? I prefer other word... and I'm not trying to be picky, Haha. Well, it's alright, thanks. --Laitche (talk) 02:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Jkadavoor, @Vengolis: Upload the RAW file to commonsarchive, and I will make a how-to. I invite you to read this guide about RAW files for your camera. You can read this guide about focus too. --The Photographer (talk) 12:51, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Jkadavoor, The Photographer for your great help and support.Unfortunately all those pics shot in JPEG.@The Photographer i am a newbie in photography and so much in need for help. Vengolis (talk) 06:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2015 at 16:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Disassembled Rotring Isograph and Rapidograph technical pens, vector drawing.

Rotring Isograph 0.35mm technical pen
Rotring Rapidograph 0.35mm technical pen
ISO line widths and color codes, illustrated with Rotring Rapidograph technical pens

The difference is, that with a vector graphic like this you can enlarge it infinitely without negative effects. The default display size really doesn't matter here. --El Grafo (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Infinitely? isn't true.--LivioAndronico talk 10:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That infinitely means you can see the more details in larger images (loss details) but those are not smooth because you can see kinda path (like this) of vector graphics and Bézier curve in larger images, but it's actually infinite at times, that depends on the way of making. --Laitche (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@LB If my comment is wrong, please remark. --Laitche (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 12:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

Could somebody please change this to being featured? I don't feel comfortable doing all the steps correctly. @Poco a poco: , could you please do this? --LB 21:50, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed your comment and just read it. Poco2 19:56, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2015 at 08:52:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black Drongo Dicrurus macrocercus on a typical wire.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:42, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 17:26:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock's tree peony (Paeonia rockii)
  •  Comment It is the flower revealing from a bud. The middle is still hidden partially by petals. The nature lives not according to a drawings for the sake of symmetry. I wanted to show freshness and awakening of this flower. This plant blossoms only few days, so new photos will be at next year. Anyway, thanks for the review. -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 19:41, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 18:29:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of Santi Nereo e Achilleo
King of : The current Cardinal Priest of the Titulus Ss. Nerei et Achillei is Theodore Edgar McCarrick that came from your zone --LivioAndronico talk 19:37, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose Nice, but strong magenta flare around the right pillar of the baldachin, close to the altar. Even visible at thumbnail. Not correctible I'm afraid--Jebulon (talk) 20:23, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose Too soft in focus for me in the background at the top. I think you should have set the exposure time to 30 sec, and have chosen a suitable smaller aperture to get more DOF. Does not reach the current very high church interior bar. Do you have the new version 6 of Lightroom? I can recommend it as it has a builtin HDR merge, from which you can combine several exposures and get a "super-raw" with much more dynamic range (you can find a few of these in my recent uploads). I think it works very well and convenient with single frames (I still use PTGui for HDR panos) and would be suitable for these kinds of church interiors to get better results. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • With HDR of Photoshop or Lightroom is a disgusting, also do not have time, because you see these empty churches are full of tourists and also expect also two hours to find the time that there isn't people, and are usually a few moments --LivioAndronico talk 20:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A technical discussion about HDR merge in Lightroom 6
    • I fully agree HDR in Photoshop is utter disgusting; but it works very differently in Lightroom 6. For instance, I just uploaded this Lightroom 6 tone-mapped HDR of three exposures 2 EV apart. I think you agree with me, that it does not look artificial? On the contrary, it helps to avoid the blown highlights while getting the details out of the shadows, much as your eyes do with their logarithmic response. You can setup your camera for a bracketed exposures, such that it does not take a long time to take. You can even repeat it a few times to avoid having people in the same place as the HDR merge in Lightroom also has the ability to remove ghosts. LR can also align the exposures if they are not perfectly eligned due to, e.g., shutter snap. Just a friendly advice. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]
      • Slaunger my camera is the D3200 that haven't the bracketed exposures --LivioAndronico talk 21:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]
        • My bad, I did not realize that. Still, manually changing the shutter time does not take long. I do that occasionally, when the three brackets I have at my disposal is not [[::File:Viborg by night 2014-11-04 exposure fused.jpg|enough]]. And again, do not worry that changing it will ruin the alignment. LR can autoalign the exposures and it works quite well. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • I repeat : I do not have time, because you see these empty churches but are full of tourists and I expect also two hours to find the time that there isn't people, and are usually a few moments --LivioAndronico talk 21:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slaunger is right, the HDR function in Lightroom 6 works very well, I already used it quite often and I am very happy with the results. The pictures become dramatically better. Well, my new EOS 6D is able to take AEB with up to seven pictures which makes the whole thing easier, of course (but when doing night shots you have to use high ISO because the AEB isn't able to make exposures of more then 30s - the other option is to do it manually using BULB. But I think this shouldn't be a problem when doing church interiors what I didn't try yet). But as Slaunger said you can do this manually, as well. You should really try it. By the way: When I took this, this and some other pictures of monuments in Berlin, I had to wait for more than two hours taking lots of pictures until I got some on which no tourists were to see. The longer you set the exposure time, the less ghosts you have on the picture. @Slaunger: In my opinion the HDR of LR 6 is very good but the automatic ghost removal is completely crap. I don't know if it is my fault but it completely ruins the picture. I will upload an example as soon as I have the time. Maybe you can give me a hint if I am doing something wrong. --Code (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Code: I agree with you that the deghosting feature does work too well. I have yet to find an example of my own where it actually works. I have seen it work in a tutorial video from Adobe, but that is it. Maybe it is just marketing bullocks. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2015 at 21:25:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden Mountains (Sudetes), Poland, exposure from Borówkowa
@Jacek Halicki: Double vote? or something wrong with your pc? --Laitche (talk) 12:26, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's my mistake. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 08:59:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Java Pony (Equus ferus caballus) at Bromo Tengger Semeru National Park, East Java, Indonesia.
Yes, it is fog. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2015 at 12:29:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fly on stump
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 17:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Santa Maria in Monticelli (Rome) - interior.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 12:43:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Maria in Monticelli (Rome) - interior

Santa Maria in Monticelli. A church was founded at the site in the 12th century and reconsecrated by Innocent II in 1143. It was known as Sancta Maria in Monticellis Arenulae de Urbe, in a bull by Urban IV in 1264. Little remains of the medieval church, except for the bell-tower. The church was entirely reconstructed in 1716 by Matteo Sassi, on a commission by Clement XI, and in 1860 by Francesco Azzurri. The church is the home to the Curia Generalizia dei Padri Dottrinari.All by -- LivioAndronico talk 12:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 05:14:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Slussen.
  •  Comment Well 1/6 - 1/5 could be handheld shot, depend on f. You could put ISO to 800 not losing anything, benefiting in compostion. Camera is good FF. --Mile (talk) 11:40, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Higher ISO would affect the quality, even with the D600. Especially if you consider that this image has large contrasts between light and dark areas. It requires post-processing of the dark areas (shadows), a higher ISO had given a lot more noise in the dark areas. The lens has not particularly good corner sharpness at larger aperture, therefore f/8.--ArildV (talk) 11:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, I believe that it would have been a bad idea to pointing the camera down more. It would disturb other parts of the composition and provide more distortion, and the bus is not an essential part of the composition.--ArildV (talk) 12:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Maybe you are rigth, lens are often a problem, i dont know which you used, i checked now sky, it gave you banding and posterization (see notes). --Mile (talk) 12:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Even when I stare at the images in full resolution (22 MP uncompressed wide-angle) its very difficult to see, I'm not even sure I can even see what you're talking about. Anyway, I do not think it is a big problem and the overall quality (especially if one takes into account the resolution) is above average for wide-angle-FP.--ArildV (talk) 14:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:22, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 20:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of Saints Peter and Paul. Albrechtice, Moravian-Silesian Region, Czech Republic.
✓ Done New, better version uploaded. Please take a look again. --Halavar (talk) 23:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. Look at the upper left. Looks grey. There is undersaturation too. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Halavar (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral. Better, but no much wow and quality isn't the best. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Bot things fixed. Please take a look again. --Halavar (talk) 09:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 04:43, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 20:25:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rewal beach during sunset. Special Area of Conservation "Trzebiatowsko-Kołobrzeski Pas Nadmorski".
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 04:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2015 at 13:43:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Faro de La Entallada, Tuineje, Fuerteventura, Canary Islands. Panoramic view from south east.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 04:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2015 at 20:20:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise in Pärnu river
Laitche is right, Donninigeorgia, it´s tilted cw. Pretty obvious.--Hubertl (talk) 09:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

edit

Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 04:45, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 09:15:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
@Hubertl: Signature please. --Laitche (talk) 18:40, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment There are no needs for Wichtigtuer, Fotoriety --Hubertl (talk) 09:10, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Right back at you buddy.--Fotoriety (talk) 00:35, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not and never will be a buddy from Trittbrettfahrer.--Hubertl (talk) 07:23, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you keep interspersing your English with German words? This is not an English-German language page.--Fotoriety (talk) 00:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 09:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 05:30:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dawn. A pond on the Tomashpilka river
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 09:37, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2015 at 02:43:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lucy Evans Baylands Nature Interpretive Center

Alt

edit

Alt 2

edit

Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2015 at 07:09:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Long Island City
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 17:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2015 at 22:53:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 17:27, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:1635 Blaeu Map Guiana, Venezuela, and El Dorado - Geographicus - Guiana-blaeu-1635.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 16:39:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is G. Blaeu's remarkable c. 1635 map of the northwestern parts of South America , Lake Parima (Parime Lacus), and the route to El Dorado.
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 22:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Maps

File:2014.08.09.-11-Durbach--Weingut Schloss Staufenberg.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 20:00:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 21:49, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#In_Germany

File:Apse mosaic - Basilica of San Vitale (Ravenna).jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2015 at 14:20:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apse mosaic in basilica of San Vitale, Ravenna, Italy. Built 547. A.D. UNESCO World heritage site.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 09:27, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2015 at 20:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tramway bridge (Weil am Rhein)
Es wurde exakt ausgerichtet und auch bei nochmaliger Prüfung kann ich kein Hängen zu einer Seite hin feststellen, das mag eher der Eindruck durch die perspektivische Sicht sein. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Es ist richtig, dass der linke Mast minimal schief ist, aber das ist wohl aufgrund seiner Bauweise so. Vergleiche das direkt davorliegenden Geländer und den anderen Masten. -- -donald- (talk) 06:01, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 21:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges

File:Albert Bridge at night, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 11:43:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Albert Bridge at night
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 14:20, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2015 at 02:16:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palm Springs International Airport
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 14:26, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Saint-Séverin Sanctuary, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 11:37:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint-Séverin Sanctuary
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 14:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2015 at 03:08:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three Arch Bay Laguan Beach California
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 14:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Jan 2006.jpg, delisted

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2015 at 05:04:01
Version 1 Version 2

File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Jan 2006.jpg (left)

edit

File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Corrected Jan 2006.jpg (right)

edit 
Result: 8 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral → delisted./Laitche (talk) 17:43, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Delisted alternative is File:Lower Manhattan from Staten Island Ferry Jan 2006.jpg[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2015 at 14:27:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lahn bridge in Dehrn
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2015 at 20:13:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Miners' Change Room, Rammelsberg
  • @Poco a poco: : Thanks for your review and question. I used a tripod with shortest possible length of legs. The height of the room is also large as can be seen from the picture I have linked to in my nomination text. The annotation in that picture show where this picture was taken in the large change room. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Fountain of the Four Rivers - river god Ganges (Rome).jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2015 at 20:35:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fountain of the Four Rivers (Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi), Piazza Navona, Rome, Italy.
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2015 at 12:21:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Rochus chapel
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 15:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2015 at 12:24:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Rochus chapel
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 15:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:St-Etienne-du-Mont Interior 1, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2015 at 18:09:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Bratyslawa Cumil.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2015 at 17:37:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Statue of Man at Work in Bratislava
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Average quality, random crop, as per above comments. Yann (talk) 22:42, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2015 at 22:16:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Pahalgam Valley
  • I'm actually looking for the original RAWs to redo this image - the pine trees are really dark in real life too (and almost against the sun), will see if anything can be done about it but no promises. KennyOMG (talk) 21:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:14, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2015 at 12:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:08, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2015 at 19:15:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Charnel House, Cliffe, UK
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2015 at 19:55:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hauaneeme bay, Lahemaa National Park
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2015 at 15:52:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lycoperdon perlatum
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi

File:Rabier - Tintin-Lutin, 1898.djvu, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2015 at 07:56:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tintin-Lutin, a comic book from the french illustrator Benjamin Rabier.
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 15:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2015 at 09:19:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Dal Lake and the city of Srinagar from Shankaracharya Hill
  • hehe, feel free to nominate. ;)
You can vote support for your own photo of course :) --Laitche (talk) 23:57, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:56, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 21:49:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shell of a Green Abalone, Haliotis fulgens fulgens
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 05:25, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Lörrach - Germanuskirche bei Nacht1.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2015 at 21:19:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Germanus Church at dusk in Lörrach, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 05:24, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aparados da Serra 17.JPG

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 01:42:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Tés de cafés após a passagem da maquina de colheita.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2015 at 17:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rows of coffee trees after recent harvest by machine and sugar cane growing in distance. Altinópolis, São Paulo state, Brazil.

File:Dante Gabriel Rossetti - Joan of Arc (1882).jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 08:18:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dante Gabriel Rossetti's Joan of Arc (1882)
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:34, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Webysther 20150509172554 - Estação da Luz.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 06:32:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Estação da Luz in downtown Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Are you ok? :) --The Photographer (talk) 16:23, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah!!!! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Someone! Help! And EXIF (Metadata) is wrong. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts: ✓ Done. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:45, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose, FPC should be a thoroughly made photo, this photo have colour issues, composition, and light.
[2] in 4 min using a jpeg file, the sky was improved, and the sharpness also. I could not fixed this magenta issue, normal to DSLR (and some crap Instagram filters), because this takes time and better results just with the RAW files.
Cropping this image, will made this worst, this should have a little bit of area, the problem is the composition.
If you wanted to show the street, get there and the street: e.g.
If you wanted to show the station, File:Estação da Luz.jpg
If you wanted to illustrate the rail road entrance, go there: [3] [4]
But you stuck in the middle, leaving a stick in middle of your subject. It's unique, but not good, you can clone stamp the pole and the green abandoned area is a distraction...
And now I realise that the author was not the nominator, so the light issue I will not give my view, but this is not a good time, 30 min more, and boom, a golden hour photo [5] [6]... 1h more, blue hour not a good photo but see where is the sun
Seya, I will probably seat there and do a picture on this coming months (we can go there together with you want), I just need a non event situation on Pinacoteca ruining the photo :D. -- RTA 10:49, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Rodrigo.Argenton: , could you help to Webysther for upload of panoramic RAW files to commonsarchive. (Mio português não e muito bom). In this way we could try fix the image problems. --The Photographer (talk) 11:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 19:08:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animated
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 21:23:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buddha Shakyamuni as Lord of the Munis
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 06:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 21:39:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

July 4th fireworks, Washington, D.C.
I withdrew the alternative since Yann left the message on my talk page and this file has been overwritten with cloned image (former alternative). --Laitche (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Fixed --Laitche (talk) 11:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 06:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2015 at 21:43:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 06:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berdorf (LU), Schiessentümpel -- 2015 -- 6033.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2015 at 06:09:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schiessentümpel near Berdorf in Luxemburg (looking from the bridge at this place)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:25, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2015 at 12:49:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Highland cattle
Você esta muito maluco ultimamente :) --The Photographer (talk) 15:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In this case I found it interesting to give more emphasis to the wig :) --The Photographer (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:16, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Newag Impuls (31WE-004A) - Wrocław (Breslau).JPG, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2015 at 21:24:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Newag Impuls in Wrocław (Breslau), Silesia
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2015 at 07:00:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:21, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2015 at 13:28:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset over Hanoi
  • Umm... If you don't use auto WB, you need to use a 'preset' instead, which isn't necessary the correct option either. Setting WB manually in a RAW processor like Lightroom is much more likely to give you authentic colours. Are you not shooting in RAW? If not, you really should. Diliff (talk) 14:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I am shooting in RAW and am even discarding the JPG versions when importing the photos onto my library. I did this change of WB setting on the camera after noticing that the sky color was not consistent from one photo to the next when giving a first try at shooting this panorama. Still now, I see this issue while viewing the RAW photos in Lightroom, on top of having much paler colors in the sky. But the RAW photos that I took after disabling the automatic WB setting, which have the same Lightroom preset applied to them, don't have this issue and look much more vivid/authentic. As such, I'm not too sure what's happening but I conclude that disabling the automatic WB setting on the camera definitely has a positive effect, at least in this case :) -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 14:28, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you shoot RAW, then the WB setting in the camera has absolutely no effect on the RAW file. Normally it only affects JPGs. The WB setting is not 'solidified' until a JPG is created. Perhaps your RAW converter is using the camera's auto WB setting, but it would allow you to use any alternative WB setting when you process the RAW file and the camera's WB setting has no effect at all on that. Diliff (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diliff, the camera's chosen WB (and whether it was automatic or preset or custom) is saved in the RAW and used by all RAW converters as the default for processing. It also affects the embedded JPG preview, the image you see when chimping, and the histogram on your camera display. Yes you are free to change the WB in an authentic way that is not really possible once backed into the JPG. I'm curious you think this may only "perhaps" affect the converter -- perhaps you have your Lightroom set up to ignore this on import, or Canon doesn't save it? But Christopher, you are right that unless each frame in a panorama is consistent in temperature/tint then it won't stitch properly. As Diliff says, unless you use AWB then you yourself must choose how to interpret the temperature and tints on the scene. I think that unless you take great care, using manual WB will actually create a good deal of post-processing work as you have to fix all your indoor shots taken with "Cloudy" WB or all your outdoor shots taken with "Tungsten" WB. Most cameras do a pretty good job of this so I see no harm in leaving it on. You can always choose "Cloudy" later in Lightroom if you want. I use AWB but when I import a set that I want to make into a panorama, then I ensure they all have the same temperature and tint (pick one that looks right or the average value in the set). The other thing worth applying to all photos in your set is the same lens profile correction -- do this before exporting the TIFFs for panorama creation. -- Colin (talk) 17:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I said perhaps because it depends on your RAW converter, and your import settings (I don't set it to ignore the WB settings but the first thing I do when I open up an image is manually set the WB so the auto WB settings are almost irrelevant to me). Canon does embed the chosen in-camera WB settings, but the point is that regardless of what setting you use on your camera, you can (and normally, should) make any change you want when you process the RAW into a JPG. I just wanted to make sure that Christopher was aware that the in-camera WB settings are largely irrelevant in terms of processing RAW files. Yes, they might affect the default view when you first import the RAW file into a converter, but that's about it. No matter what WB settings your camera uses, you can change it later. That's the beauty of RAW. I just took issue with (or rather, I was concerned with) the statement that "disabling the automatic WB" with "no post-processing required" gives "authentic colours". Better to forget about in-camera WB and just adjust it manually later. Yes, it requires post-processing, but it's necessary. Neither auto-WB nor a preset will give accurate colours with regularity unless the lighting is very predictable and static. And then there's the question of what 'accurate colours' actually means, especially with something as inherently warm-tinted as a sunset... It's kind of a moot point. :-) Diliff (talk) 17:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The X100S is marketed as being able to render accurate colors when in JPG mode but so far my RAW photos weren't that accurate—by default—for such sunsets. I thought that this WB setting was maybe the key to unlock this trait without me doing some guesses in post-processing. I understand that I could have been wrong thinking this, and that I only have been lucky on that one. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assume your camera has various processing modes for its JPGs (with names like Standard, Natural, Vivid, Portrait). So what you see on your JPG does depend on what mode you've picked. Similarly, Lightroom/CameraRAW has several modes. The default is "Adobe Standard" which is supposed to be a calibrated neutral. Often there are other profiles available that are designed to more closely match the manufacturer's profiles (Sony's "Standard", is different to Adobe's). I don't know if these are available for Fuji but you may prefer them if available. See Adjust the color calibration for your camera and How to Get Accurate Fuji Colors in Lightroom. I see from this second article, that only the temperature/tint is transmitted from Fuji RAW to Lightroom, not the name of the white balance preset used. For the panoramas, the vital thing is that each frame has the same settings (whether done in the camera or in Lightroom doesn't matter), but the "correct" temperature for a sunset photo is really personal. -- Colin (talk) 07:46, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ignore the marketing, some cameras might be better than others at estimating the WB but you can only really be sure of it being neutralised in situations where there is only a single light source with a consistent WB temperature and a truly grey object that you can use to base your WB from. In any other complex situation like sunsets and scenes with multiple light sources (eg sunlight, incandescent lights, fluorescent lights, sodium lights), you can never truly get a neutral WB for all of them. Sometimes you simply don't want to either. As Colin says, your choice of WB for many scenes is not about 'correct' WB, it's about personal choice. For a sunset, you typically want warm hues, you don't want to neutralise them. Other scenes don't look very good if you don't completely neutralise the warm or cool hue. That's why manual adjustment of WB is crucial. Don't rely on your camera's WB settings whether it be auto or a preset. Use them as a starting point if you want, but use your own judgement when processing the RAW files to find what looks best for the scene. Diliff (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Please correct the typo in the filename. Daniel Case (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • They're water tanks. Probably to provide reliable water pressure? Hanoi is very flat - on a river delta, so I'm guessing the municipal water supply doesn't come from the mountains, and would require local water towers, or tanks on top of individual buildings. Diliff (talk) 19:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, they are water tanks but I had no idea what they were doing up there on each building of Vietnam until Diliff's explanation :) On a side note, it's not possible to see it on this photo but some terraces/balconies are surrounded with a mesh/grid. Why? So they can put some chicken there. With all these roosters shouting all day long, it's like living in a farm. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 08:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diliff, thank's for the explanation but lots of places are very flat and get water from low (including London). We have municipal water towers to supply the even pressure to our taps. I don't know why you would need a private personal version, unless the water supply was so erratic that you wanted to hoard some water for yourself. -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colin, I know we have water towers in London. I was just guessing that their water supply pressure is not reliable enough, I don't know for sure. But that's generally why people have water towers on top of the building. I did also find this article which suggests that it could be either because the maximum height of the water towers is less than the buildings, or because of the limitations of the building's plumbing. Diliff (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's funny you say that because, when checking the photo preview on my camera, I was so happy to see that the sky colors were identical but it's only later on that I regretted to not have also compared the colors/luminosity of the buildings. The sun was already below the horizon when the photo was taken though, so maybe the grayness is fair enough? I'll try to pay more attention next time. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 01:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's funny that KoH says the buildings have a 'greyness'. I'd say they are very strongly tinted blue actually, not grey. It relates to what I was talking about above in the WB discussion. You have set the WB for the sunset, at the expense of the foreground shadow detail, which has resulted in very cool tones in the shadows. Not that you did anything wrong. You could manually reduce the saturation of the blues to compensate but that would only make it more grey, not less. If you use Lightroom, you could also 'paint' a warm WB adjustment over the shadows to compensate. Diliff (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect he means that the buildings are rather desaturated, rather than that they are neutral grey (they aren't, but are blueish). The red roofs for example, are not vivid, which they would be in daylight. -- Colin (talk) 10:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Wrocław (Breslau) - Dominsel.JPG, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2015 at 21:27:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wrocław (Breslau), Silesia - Ostrów Tumski (Dominsel)
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pedra Furada Padrão.JPG

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 16:04:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pedra Furada, São Joaquim National Park, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2015 at 12:24:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fresco of hall of Apollo in Villa d'Este (Tivoli)
  •  Oppose I am sorry, very nice shoot, however, pincushion distortion and right side is  Underexposed, top right corner is cut. if it is fixed I will change my vote. its fixable, I think so --The Photographer (talk) 23:31, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The Photographer and King I tried to improve the picture, I do not know if is better,thanks --LivioAndronico talk 07:13, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work with the light, because it was the more difficult for fix, now you only need fix pincushion distortion --The Photographer (talk) 10:01, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks The Photographer, unfortunately what you see is not a fresco on a flat surface but curve and because of this has some distortion, also in the 15 century they were not precisely accurate ...--LivioAndronico talk 11:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The question is already answered above, it "is not a fresco on a flat surface but curve and because of this has some distortion" --The Photographer (talk) 20:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And why didn't you mention that not precisely unimportant information? The opposes -as far as I see- assume that there is pincushion distortion, but it is a normal effect due to the fact that the middle is further from the camera than the corners. So, maybe it is something that voters should be aware of. On the other side the uneven lighting and the cut corners are real problems for me, therefore  Neutral (but this border/frame is IMHO much better than in the FPC Jebulon opened) Poco2 20:48, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I don't write the kind of surface....next time I can write Poco,thanks... --LivioAndronico talk 20:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I maybe wouldn't have done it either. But latest when you get opposes due to a distortion problem of your lens that is none, then you should provide this information in your defense Poco2 21:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But I wrote it, read up --LivioAndronico talk 21:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry, you are right, I oversaw it :S Poco2 22:04, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would support if you can correct the crop at the upper right corner. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done In this way The Photographer,King of ♥ ♦ and Yann? Thanks --LivioAndronico talk 10:08, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak  Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:28, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2015 at 11:39:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gröna Lund
Agree with Julian, it looks really odd to see grey light bulbs (Highlights -100 in Lightroom EXIF). Just let 'em blow! One definition of HDR is photography that can capture the DR of a light source, and this scene can't reasonably be HDR. -- Colin (talk) 17:18, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, better. Still a lot of clipping and a tiny bit of missing wow.  Neutral. — Julian H.✈ 11:06, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment @Julian Herzog and Colin: Thank you, now I understand Julians review better. I uploaded a new version. I changed the highlights setting to -27, I compensated for it by using the local adjustment brush to make the carousel darker. The images is also brighter now (as requested by some user above).--ArildV (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak  Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 13:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2015 at 17:29:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The snow-covered road from Sosonka village to the highway M21. Ukraine
Hmm... I feel George is trying to take a good (or nice) photo but it's required wowed photo for the FP, just my opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 10:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@George Chernilevsky: Maybe I'm wrong but from what I know the histogram show the edited version. You can decrease white and highlight levels as you want in the editing process thus the histogram will say ok. But It stay always a little details lost if there was an overexposition when taking the photo. It is possible to have an "ok" histogram with an image totaly blown. -- Christian Ferrer 06:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC) Histograms of edited version don't say if there is details lost when clicking on the camera to shoot the photo. Enough edited, 100% of the images of Commons can have a histigram ok, are they all FP? no. The mood is very nice here and the scene is pretty, but to my eyes have it been a bit overexposed? yes some few details, just a few I agree, are clearly lost despite of any histogram. -- Christian Ferrer 07:04, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
File "as is" from my Canon EOS 550D. Any software was not used -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:41, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Laitche (talk) 15:15, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 19:11, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 01:15:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cranes made by Origami paper
Hahaha, it might be similar Japanese feeling. --Laitche (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 11:50:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Polychromy on the City Scales House in Nysa
I think Alvesgaspar style is only windows... --Laitche (talk) 15:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right Laitche --LivioAndronico talk 16:29, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 13:18, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 09:17:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fountain water droplets as seen on very short time exsposure of 1/16.000 s.
  •  Comment There is some, but due to nature of it, you cant just move "cursor" in software and remove it. This is refraction-diffraction-polarization mess, that is about it. Also, CA is very rare, you probably messed up with diffraction. --Mile (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural_phenomena#Liquid

File:Frans Post - Gezicht op Olinda, Brazilië.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 11:32:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Olinda, Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 13:17, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gargoyles and Saints - Siena Cathedral.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2015 at 12:20:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gargoyles and Saints of Siena Cathedral facade, built 11-13. century, Italy.
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 07:57:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lindi Nature Reserve in Estonia
According to the author the image was indeed more colorful, but he reduced the colors so that the spider nets would stand out more.
BTW: the name of the image also makes a direct reference to the spider nets and means "there does the spiders sleep". Kruusamägi (talk) 13:43, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for asking :) --Laitche (talk) 14:21, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot also from me! It's a highly unusual photo. Therefore I'd like to  Support it. :) --Tremonist (talk) 15:35, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 16:58:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stalactites in Bear Cave in Kletno (Lower Silesia, Poland)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Graphium 21:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2015 at 18:31:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama view of Los Aguarales de Valpalmas, a rare, fragile and dynamic geological phenomena located near Valpalmas, Zaragoza, Spain. The landscape is the result of water flows over fragile material in a process known as piping
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Graphium 21:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2015 at 19:44:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the small village of Moros and its surroundings, province of Zaragoza, Aragón, Spain. The whole village of Moros lies on a hill, with the most relevant buildings in the top (church and former town hall), the residences in the middle and the sheep pens at the bottom. The current population of Moros is 441 people (35% of the population one century ago, that's why many houses are abandoned). The picture is the result of the blend of 15 pictures (panorama stitch of 5 frames x 3 frames for HDR). I try it again after this nomination didn't work.
@ArionEstar: You may be too picky when judge the photos, they look at photos at 100% not 400% zoom... in my opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 08:31, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is a slight improvement. The foreground looks better now, but the transition between the foreground and sky is still not good. The sky being darker than the foreground is only one of a number of problems I have with the image though. Mostly it's the overall tonality that doesn't look right to me, which is the same problem I have with most of your HDR images. I don't mean that to sound harsh, but the truth is that I find Tufuse's results unattractive and from past experience, you aren't interested in changing it (I've suggested a better workflow a number of times and you've said you're happy with the results of Tufuse). If it was an issue that was simple to fix, I would probably have waited for the fix before voting, but I don't think it is - it would require a major rethink in how your image is processed. But anyway, I don't see the problem with voting first and striking it out if the problem(s) are addressed. Diliff (talk) 22:28, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Slight oppose So much was done right ... the detail is fine all around. But David's points about the still-artificial character of the lighting and the visible overprocessing in some areas still stand despite the improvements. Daniel Case (talk) 15:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Alright, they have been addressed to my satisfaction. Daniel Case (talk) 16:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:54, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Even after the discussion between ArionEstar and Poco2 above, I still clearly see a distracting and strong glow where the hills meet the sky. I am not convinced that HDR is strictly necessary for this scene -- and even if it was, the author should greatly increase the "smoothness" or "radius" slider on your tone mapping software, or use one of the established methods for edge aware HDR merging which do not introduce these unsightly halos. Dllu (talk) 01:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Graphium 21:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Ahaetulla prasina, oriental whipsnake - Kaeng Krachan National Park.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2015 at 01:14:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ahaetulla prasina, oriental whipsnake - Kaeng Krachan National Park
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 06:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2015 at 01:37:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Single note angklung
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 06:25, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Biebrza NP in Dolistowo (02).jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 11:28:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Biebrza National Park, Poland
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2015 at 18:07:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Comment ArionEstar, the scene has naturally a great dynamic range, from specular reflections in the water created by its turbulence because of the quick movements of the crocs, to the shadow areas of the dark skin of the crocs. The specular reflections are imposible to control, for basically the sun is reflecting on the water and there is no way to control them in this type of scene. The dark skin in the shadows creates another problem but it is managed somehow here. In short, lighting conditions are terrible, but the event can be rescued somehow with some drama. There are not many photographs of fighting crocs and this is probably the only one in Commons. A photograph has to be judged not only in terms of obtainable quality pixel, exposure wise, but of the type of event. A picture of church interiors, where everything is still and there is ample time to set up the camera on a tripod demands a much more severly quality criteria than a picture of a rare and fast moving event. Not all pictures can be judged the same. For example, Robert Capa´s photograph of the Spanish Civil War, the moment of death, or his pictures of D Day are technically blurred and with other faults, but the extraordinary moment that they capture erase any technical flaws. Photography is not about pixels, hdr, stitching or post processing only, which seems to be the case here in FPC, but also about eternalizing fleeting moments. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:09, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I´ve been surfing the net to find fighting crocodile pictures and I find next to nothing. However, here is a video of crocs feeding on gazzelles, which show the quick movements of crocs. .#REDIRECT[[8]]. It is really too bad that lighting was what it was where I was, but it was what it was :( . Still, this is an uncommon photograph. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:18, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Anybody that knows a little about zone system would know that specular reflections are impossible to control. Basically, a specular reflection is the sun itself reflecting on a shinny surface. To bring that surface into the dynamic range of the image would automatically render everything else totally dark, for the luminosity scale shifts as a unit, and we would have a bad picture of sun reflections on the water and nothing else. This picture captures dark objects in the shadows and renders them within the texture range even on a high contrast, back lit scene. As for the aesthetics, well, how much aesthetics can two fast moving fighting crocodiles offer? This is not meant to be a pretty picture, but a rendition of animal behaviour in the wild. One thing is to photograph old empty churches maintained as tourist attractions where the photographer enjoys the comfort of time, location and stillness and another to photograph the moving world under adverse conditions and come out with little observed behaviour of the animal kingdom. Aside from the "technical" issue of specular reflections, I think that the photograph captures the drama of the event in above average detail. Can anyone find a better picture in the net of fighting crocs? Not that this is the best, but definitely a good one, and definitely illustrative. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stop comparing your photos to churches. Everyone knows they're different subjects. Also, you apparently don't understand that churches are not easy to photograph (well) as you imply. They're usually not empty or maintained as tourist attractions, it's only with skill, patience and timing that I can capture them as I do. The same amount of skill, patience and timing required to take a good photograph of wildlife IMO. I also never mentioned specular highlights, so I'm not sure why you've brought that up, although I agree with Alchemist that a polarising filter would have helped. There are so many other ways to photograph fighting crocs in both a more interesting and a more aesthetic manner. It's trivially easy to find a better photo of the subject on the net. Yes, your photo has above average detail, but very little charisma that the images I linked to have - that's the sort of action I'd want to see in a FP of fighting crocodiles. Diliff (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure... You really knock me out with those trivially better images of fighting crocs. I do point out however, that what you share as fighting crocs, at least in two images, they are just sunbathing. Crocs sunbathe with their mouthhs open all the time. Commn behavior not to be confused with fighting... ;) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear David, fyi, here are opened mouthed crocs taking a sunbath, a very common behavior with american crocodiles. Also, it may be good for you to distinguish between alligators and crocs... They ain´t the same... #REDIRECT[[9]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:17, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 08:28, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2015 at 19:18:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Japanese Hill-and-Pond Garden, Brooklyn Botanic Garden
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 08:26, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2015 at 14:16:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Siegestor in Munich at Dusk
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 08:24, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Brazilian savana Flower.JPG

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2015 at 17:56:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A flower of Paepalanthus from the Brazilian Savanas, known as Cerrado

File:Railway workshop.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 06:07:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old railway workshop. Now part of museum exhibition.

File:Laon Cathedral East Window, Picardy, France - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 06:54:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Laon Cathedral East Window, Picardy, France
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:15-06-06-Schloßkirche-Schwerin-RalfR-N3S 7417 8 9-.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 19:11:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schwerin Castle Church, baptismal font, altar and stained glass windows in the choir

 I withdraw my nomination

File:Statue of John of Nepomuk near Saint Matthew church in Wrocław (Breslau).jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 17:27:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Statue of John of Nepomuk near Saint Matthew church in Wrocław (Breslau)
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 03:28:48 (UTC)

Honestly, I see no issues to put an image in two different galleries when it's relevant. -- Christian Ferrer 17:06, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alt

edit

Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:33, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 15:02:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alessandro Martinelli, football player who plays for Modena FC
I think anything but this square crop would have been detrimental. The subject of this image is the kick that's about to happen. He's got his leg back as far as he can, certainly farther than you or I could cock it (that's why they pay him the big bucks ), and there's so much potential energy in that pose that we know that ball is either going somewhere very far away or somewhere near at a very high speed. That would be lost, IMO, in a more horizontal shot. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support One of the best sports shots I've seen here in a long time. And very nice to have a soccer shot that captures the apex of a kick in so dynamic a fashion. I love the detail ... especially the dirt coming off his back cleat. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I want to thank you for your great comment, I really appreciated it. Hope to satisfy you again in the future!--Matteo Brama (talk) 11:34, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports

File:A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms - Pieter Aertsen - Google Cultural Institute.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 01:07:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:27, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Basilica of Saint Denis Choir Misericords, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2015 at 14:57:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Denis Choir Misericords
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Brompton Oratory Nave 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2015 at 15:05:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brompton Oratory Interior
  •  Support --XRay talk 16:09, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support — Julian H.✈ 17:07, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Wonderful. --Code (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Nice colors. I suppose you didnt want to chop that part of glass cupola on top. --Mile (talk) 17:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:57, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support w・o・w --Laitche (talk) 18:02, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:03, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:51, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 07:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Kadellar (talk) 11:19, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Delicious. Daniel Case (talk) 16:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Unnatural looking top dome. While the picture is almost perfect to a fault, as Jebulon pointed out on a similar picture, the columns become oval, and I wonder just how many distortions there are that make the image not truly representative of the real scene. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I'm afraid I agree with Tomas that the angle of view is too extreme here. On other images, one might "get away with it" but the dome just looks like it is angled at 45-degrees rather than straight down. And the magnification at the left/right edges is large. I've suggested a crop that I would support, which minimises the distortions. -- Colin (talk) 12:22, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, but why is this distortion a problem here and not a problem in a fisheye image? Both have distortions owing to the extreme angle of view, but fisheye is a legitimate projection and this is not? Diliff (talk) 12:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why are you asking me? You already know the literature on wide-angle perspective issues since Leonardo da Vinci and others documented them and tried to limit them. This is a straight documentary image of the interior rather than an artistic perspective that revels in its distortions. It is clear in a fisheye image that the view is not straightforward, and nobody is under any illusion that the curves are real. Here, it is disturbing to see the angle of that dome. The degree to which one can accept such distortions depends on the features in the scene and on the individual viewer. Consider a photo taken at an extreme angle may (or may not) succeed at an artistic level, but a photo with just a slight tilt just looks like a mistake. This isn't the first time I've opposed where a circular ceiling or wall feature gets distorted too much for comfort. Perhaps I am more sensitive to it than others, but to me this is easily solvable by a more modest angle of view (as suggested on the image page). -- Colin (talk) 12:58, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • I already have my own opinions on distortion and I believe the distortion is reasonable here, so I'm asking you why you support your own image with a greater vertical angle of view but not this one. You mention the way the dome looks, but what of the top and bottom of the escalators? You're viewing them at a near 90 degree angle, but that's not a problem because you declared it to be artistic rather than documentary? ;-) It's no more or less a problem than the dome IMO. It's an inherent feature of the vertical angle of view and the projection. You say it is a "straight documentary image" of the interior, but what if it's not? What if you re-imagined it as more creative image showing a wider angle of view than is normally possible with a straight rectilinear documentary style? I think you draw an overly sharp line between 'creative fisheye projection' and 'documentary rectilinear'. I think the truth is, particularly with the freedom of stitched images and complex projections, that there is no delineation - it is a continuum from straight-edged 'normal' perspective to the weird and wild projections of your imagination. As for the crop, I'm not really interested in cropping it to be honest, I like the view as wide as this and I think there are too many compromises in the composition with your suggested crop, so I'll let the chips fall where they may. ;-) Diliff (talk) 13:14, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Continuum fallacy. -- Colin (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • Responding to a detailed discussion featuring a number of points with a single link to an article that doesn't really relate to the discussion is rude. You could at least follow up to explain why you think the 'continuum fallacy' relates to my point. I don't think it does though - I think there clearly is a continuum. At what point does rectilinear become fisheye? At what point does rectilinear's angle of view become 'ugly' or 'wrong' as it increases? There are no precise answers to these questions, because it's a matter of opinion. Leonardo might have had his opinions on matters, but he was musing over aesthetics, not absolute truth. You know very well that it is a mathematical continuum between projections, so I really don't know why you call it a fallacy. You might look at an individual image and declare that you don't like the distortion in it and that's fair enough, but it's not so easy to say that you know where the line is drawn. The same distortion in a different image might be acceptable. In fact I'm sure it is, because you've supported many images with similar levels of distortion before. I'm not trying to change your mind about your vote, just pointing out things as I see them. Diliff (talk) 13:40, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • I really wasn't intending to be rude. In fact, I assumed you could read the article and slap yourself on the forehead without me trying to explain. I proposed two (with fuzzy definitions) styles of photography: the artistic where distortions may be accepted and even enjoyed, and the documentary where distortions are kept to a minimum. You suggested I "draw an overly sharp line" while saying there is in fact a continuum. But I never said these groups had a "sharp line" or "delineation", only that they are distinct. I point out, using the fallacy article, that one does not need to (and I did not) define any hard line between two groups and the fact that there is a continuum does not prevent it being possible to place things into distinct groups. Read the lead paragraphs of the article -- there doesn't seem much point in me repeating them. Given your statement "The same distortion in a different image might be acceptable." I'm now at a loss as to why you are arguing or questioning my vote at all.
                • It may be possible to place things into distinct groups, but there are situations where categorising things as one or the other does a disservice to it. That's why I said you draw an overly sharp line. You defined this image as documentary rectilinear, and I disagreed, pointing out that it is more truthfully somewhere on the continuum, and you responded simply by telling me (in a roundabout way) that it was a fallacy to argue that. The continuum fallacy, according to the article "appears to demonstrate that two states or conditions cannot be considered distinct (or do not exist at all)". But that's not what I implied at all. Obviously if you compare two images (fisheye and non-wide rectlinear) in isolation, it's clear that they are very different in purpose and in perspective and are thoroughly distinct. But my wide angle rectilinear images start to blur the lines between the two definitions, and that's what I was trying to point out. I often (and did so in this image) use some compression of the perspective in order to minimise distortion at the extremes, and that sometimes has the effect of compressing objects. The dome is an example of that. It looks to be taken at a 45 degree angle by its position in the image but has the perspective of something a bit greater than that. So I would argue that although my image does a good job of being a documentary photograph (verticals are straight and vertical), it is not a simple rectilinear image and should not be categorised as such. It straddles the line between fisheye and rectilinear in its angle of view and treatment of the extremes. It has the wide angle of view of fisheye but the perspective and straight lines of rectilinear. Obviously it has the compromises inherent in any fusion of perspectives, but it is part of that continuum. That's why I suggested you "re-imagined it as more creative image showing a wider angle of view than is normally possible with a straight rectilinear documentary style". Diliff (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I didn't actually say there were only two styles of photography here ("one or the other") and never argued there was a sharp line between them. You are reading things into what I said. I agree your image falls in between the two categories, and that it why it does not work, for me. It fails to be a successful documentary image since the dome appears to be at a very strange 45-degree angle and the sides are hugely out of proportion. And it fails to be a successful artistically distorted image since too much of it is perfectly straight. Like Nick Clegg trying to tell a joke. I do like, and support, many of your very-wide-angle photographs. I just think that the aspects of the scene here mean you can't get away with it and the flaws are too disturbing. -- Colin (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I never said you argued there was only two styles of photography or a sharp line between them either, it was simply my observation of the way you judged the image by pigeon-holing it as a documentary photograph. I think you still have a narrow sense of what is 'artistic' if you think that its straight lines makes it ineligible though. :-) But ok, fair enough. I won't keep this going unnecessarily. Diliff (talk) 16:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                      • Well on the first sentence, I just have to 100% disagree and lose patience. As for my narrow sense of "artistic", you never asked me for a definition of this, nor have I given one. You cannot possibly work out my sense of that from the bare examples we have been discussing. You are confusing examples with definitions I think. As I said at the start, why are you asking me? If you want to know then that requires a different approach. If it is just to have an argument, then I'm not really interested and have better things to do, sorry. -- Colin (talk) 17:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • The best explanation to your question is that the overall precision and accuracy of much of the image sets up expectations in the viewer that it is a thoroughly accurate representation of the scene. Those expectations are damaged when one examines the near dome or the extreme left and right, where angles or proportions are just completely wrong. One is left considering if it is instead an optical illusion or joke architecture rather than a very straightforward interior and a documentary photograph. With a fisheye lens, the viewer (at least one familiar with such images, as most of us are) has fewer expectations. The same with my tilted photo example. If very titled, one knows it must have been taken at an angle for some effect. If only slightly tilted, one wonders if the surface is sloping or if the camera was level and isn't really sure. -- Colin (talk) 14:37, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                • Expectations and assumptions are a dangerous thing and the cause of many a disagreement on Commons, and you've been the recipient of perhaps unfair expectations too (B&W photography). What one is left wondering is up to that individual - not necessarily my problem. ;-) Diliff (talk) 15:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:05, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Christian Ferrer 17:46, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Unreal, very distorted. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 23:18, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Great, a pity that the dome is cropped Poco2 19:44, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Distortion made by wide angle views can be a problem - here it isn't. The parts that are distorted aren't in the main view axis so the image impression is what here counts for me and this is very good. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2015 at 06:19:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Extremely high resolution panorama of Capitol Hill, Seattle and surrounding regions during sunset.
  • @Laitche: @Poco a poco: @Colin: What do you guys think of the Alternative with faithful colours below? Also, will Laitche please explain what you mean by "quality is not reaching the FP standards"? In terms of resolution, image noise, sharpness, distortion, etc, I think this is pretty good. Thanks! Dllu (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The noise level is not at all visible if you view it at 50%, which is 11194 x 3440, still much better than many other panoramas which have passed FP status. Dllu (talk) 01:13, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, if it is nominated at 50% downsampled, the noise level is probably acceptable. I think every member is judging nominated one not what if downsampled... --Laitche (talk) 01:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Laitche: You are mistaken. The Commons:Image guidelines clearly states that images should not be downsampled under any circumstance. A 150 megapixel image with a slight amount of noise when inspecting individual pixels is always better than a 15 megapixel image that appears as though it does not have any noise. Dllu (talk) 02:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, so I am not suggesting downsampling, I just wrote my thoughts why every member is not supporting this great panorama but not sure cause I don't know the others thoughts :) --Laitche (talk) 02:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Laitche: will you stop pixel-peeping. This image, when viewed on your monitor at 100% is over 5 metres wide. And are complaining about noise which is only visible from close inspection at that level on a 155MP image! We do not encourage people to downsize images for Commons and unfortunately Commons MediaWiki software cannot render a 50% view of such a large image for people to review. You say you are not suggesting downsampling but your oppose for noise leaves nominators no option but to upload downsized images to prevent this sort of petty and ignorant review. Stop it and please learn how to review digital images properly. We look at the image, not the pixels. Dllu, I'll look at the alternative tonight if I get a chance. -- Colin (talk) 07:28, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • They aren't "my ideas" but the standard mature approach to reviewing digital images. Pixel-peeping is universally regarded as a newbie mistake in all photographic forums. Your "don't criticize me, my ideas are precious" approach to life is fine for primary-school children, but in the real world of grown ups, you should welcome criticism and learn from it. Your pixel-peeping approach to image review is positively harmful to FP and you should stop doing it. Learn to look at the picture. -- Colin (talk) 10:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is most regrettable that we now need rules to document common sense. Meanwhile you continue to make a mockery of FP by complaining about noise in a 150MP image. -- Colin (talk) 11:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

edit

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 03:14:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Comment Perhaps an untrained eye would not linger on anything, except maybe on the nose. But a Carnitas Connoisseur, would see, smell and taste the delicacies of liver, small intestine, sausage, stomach, tongue, ribs... Maybe it is too ethnic in these parts. ;) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:20, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How is it shocking only to vegetarians? There's a difference between piles of intestines and a nice, sliced, steak. Or a processed burger patty. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment points up another argument against featured status. I had thought those pieces might be bits of intestine (which in any event the consumption of which is scarcely limited to Mexico), but then they also look like bits of fat. Only when you told me this did I know for sure. If it were truly featurable, it would be obvious enough that it was intestines and I wouldn't have needed your explanation.

Also, I have had carnitas a few times, particularly as a burrito filling at Chipotle, and while for all I know it may have included intestine I do not recall seeing it look like that. Nor does the carnitas in the picture that was until recently the lead image in the enwiki article show anything that looks like an intestine the way the bits in this picture do. The article itself describes carnitas as primarily meat, saying nothing about other organs of the animal being included.

Now, I'm not denying that it might be made that way wherever in Mexico the picture was taken (Maybe I'll have a chance to find out in person at Wikimania next month ...). This is just to speculate that perhaps the filename needs to be more specific.

In any event your commentary did not reach my main objection, that the image is not striking enough to be featured. Daniel Case (talk) 04:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ok... let´s take it one step at a time...
As for the requirement of obviousness needed in order to be featurable I disagree with you, because obviousness implies the capacity to distinguish a priori the elements presented. This can only happen when prior knowledge exists. That would mean that if there is an unkown element, then the image is then not featurable. However, that is a factor attributable to the observer, not the object observed. It is like saying that something does not exist because you don´t know the name of the thing. The fact that you do not distinguish between an intestine or a piece of fat is not the fault of the image or the subject itself, but the fault of lack of prior experience or knowledge. And here is precisely one of the values of photography, that it captures a subject(s) and becomes a vehicle of knowledge, presenting a vision of a non present subject that can then be incorporated to the cultural capital of the observer. Here you have gained knowledge by distinguishing between a piece of intestine from a piece of fat. That is called learning. But instead of a piece of fat, it could have been an insect, a plant, a fish, a cultural element, etc.
As for your Chipotle example, with all due respect, they are hardly representative of mexican cuisine. They may be closer than Taco Bell, but still hardly a trustworthy reference as to what Mexican food is like. Same goes for the carnitas taco in the picture that you link to, while accurate in a very, very, but very generic way, it does look like a carnitas taco, not carnitas themselves. That taco could be a shredded beed taco, a birria taco, even turkey taco, and not necessarily a carnitas taco.
I certainly wasn't trying to suggest that I was some sort of FOAK about Mexican cuisine. I'm glad for the elucidation. It suggests we do need to improve the article, and certainly this picture is a step in that direction. Daniel Case (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As far as the image is not striking enough to be featurable, well, that is your opinon and you are entitled to it. So your vote is appreciated anyway.

--Tomascastelazo (talk) 05:45, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case, that lead image is Taco; just a use of Carnitas. Hope this image and this article will give a better idea. Jee 05:28, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, those help. But it is worth noting that a) the image at Flickr shows the pot, giving a sense of scale which this image did not have, and b) the blog post suggests that what we see here may be subject to further preparation (i.e., cutting into shreds) sometimes, so (as Tomas's discussion of the taco photo I linked to suggests) it does not represent all carnitas. Daniel Case (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Tomascastelazo: I would be invited next time, please serve on my plate the ass and the tail of pork, its my favorite part. --The Photographer (talk) 11:04, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Dear Jebulon, David Case´s opinion centers on the issue that the elements are not identifiable and therefore the picture is not featurable, for if the elements were identifiable the picture would not need an explanation, and therefore be featurable. So my question is, is this the case only in this picture or is that criteria applicable to all pictures that have elements that are not identifiable by the viewer? This position, while valid on the personal level, is disastrous in an effort that seeks knowledge independent of ideological or cultural bias and is based on the cultural capital of the individual and not on the object that represents knowledge. This get close to Taliban or ISIS mentality. On the issue of aesthetics, is that a requeriment for featurableness? If so, we really have a problem, for aesthetics is culturally given to a very large degree, and would therefore render a lot of culturally centered images unacceptable to propose for FP. That, I think, is an arrogant posture where a dominant culture excludes the diversity of aesthetics, which in western civilization seems to be a prevalent position. Are foreign objects beautiful only when in agreement with another culture´s values? Dog meat, for example, to westerners is abhorrent, yet to some oriental countries it is a delicacy. Likewise cow meat, to westerners is a good thing, but Hindus would tend to disagree. Some people would think that fine french wine is grape juice gone bad. People tend to dislike those things that they do not comprehend. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose First of all, let me say that I'm perfectly fine with the content of the image – the subject itself is surely featurable, imho. I also like that you managed to almost entirely fill the frame with the meat. But there are some aspects that prevent me from supporting: 1) Julian already mentioned the reflections. 2) Composition: The nose is the only thing I can easily identify, which automatically makes it the anchor point for my eyes. Having this anchor point right in the center makes for a quite boring composition; I would probably have preferred it to be arranged around one of the vertical lines of the rule-of-thirds grid and pointing more towards the center of the frame (rather than me). 3) Lighting: The direct lighting from the top makes the most important part of my main anchor point (the front side of the nose) lie in the shadows. It is fighting for attention with the less interesting top part of the nose, which is more in the center and has lots of glistening fat (eyes are typically drawn to the brighter parts of an image). Also, shadows in general are a bit on the harsh side. A tiny little bit of fill flash from the side might have improved the lighting quite a bit (would've been tricky, though, if there was indeed a piece of glass in front of the meat). Nevertheless: Thank you for this very interesting image! --El Grafo (talk) 09:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose For all the opposers --Σπάρτακος (talk) 16:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Striked --Cart (talk) 19:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 19:35:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cirque de Gavarnie, Haute-Pyrénées, France
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:42, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 03:43:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:35, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giuseppe Verdi, Un Ballo in maschera, Vocal score frontispiece - restoration.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2015 at 15:22:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Un ballo in maschera by Giuseppe Verdi, illustration from an early vocal score.
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Halobaena caerulea in flight - SE Tasmania.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2015 at 13:45:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blue Petrel (Halobaena caerulea) , east of the Tasman Peninsula, Tasmania, Australia.
This reminds me of Return to Forever, not only image but also sounds :) --Laitche (talk) 06:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Holocnemus hispanicus - 01.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2015 at 18:03:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Holocnemus hispanicus
  • Thanks, I know about focus stacking (I've never used it), but I guess I'd need a lot of frames for a single picture of this spider. I have added the size of the body in the description. --Kadellar (talk) 18:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Estos animales son bien difíciles de fotografiar sin buena luz y con un lente regular, yo he pasado tardes de pesadilla comido por mosquitos intentando fotografiarlos. Yo, por lo general utilizo un trípode, si no puedo, utilizo tres tomas que cubran el espectro de profundidad de campo, uno frente, medio y fondo. Por eso es que vez más que todo fotos destacadas de mariposas, porque para ellas solo necesitas una corta profundidad. Es recomendable hacer toma en horas de la mañana cuando los insectos todavía no se han despertado totalmente y están más lentos, también algunos recomiendan colocarle algo de comida y esperar con el trípode listo. Dale una mirada a este manual básico y a la colección de insectos en la página de Richard. Saludos --The Photographer (talk) 13:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That would mean forcing others Kadellar? Who would have forced? And I do not find it interesting to photograph spiders or insects in general ... then?--LivioAndronico talk 11:36, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • So if you don't practice macro and therefore you don't really know about it, think twice before opposing. I seldom oppose something I don't do, like underwater photography or illustrations, because I don't have knowledge enough to do so. --Kadellar (talk) 11:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I said that I do not like, I did not say that I do not know or I can't judge it. I find it too complicated, and in fact you can see by your photo, however, because it is becoming too long and boring ..... exchange so you are happy--LivioAndronico talk 12:00, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@D kuba: {{weak support}} is invalid here so I've changed your vote to {{s|Weak support}}, Regards. --Laitche (talk) 10:02, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thx, D kuba (talk) 10:22, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 4 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:San Crisogono (Rome) - Interior.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 12:38:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

San Crisogono (Rome) - Interior
  • It would have been more elegant to put neutral because one thing you favor and one against Tomascastelazo. However that kind of perspective I can? It 'a church and if you want to see all is the only way.Besides the churches maybe he will be taken from the same point of view, but there are many types like: Medieval, Romanesque, Gothic, neoclassical, etc...I'd be curious to know the David's opinion --LivioAndronico talk 19:05, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, my opinion is that if Tomas thinks they are all indistinguishable, perhaps he should refrain from voting on church interiors in future because he seems incapable of judging them fairly. It's one thing to find a particular photo or view boring, but he seems to think that all symmetrical views of church interiors are boring and therefore a good reason to oppose, and that's a systematic bias that I think should be acknowledged. I agree with you that there's usually very limited options for locations to photograph a church interior and the most aesthetic and educational view is usually the view from the entrance looking straight down the middle. This is the way church interiors are designed to be viewed, so it makes sense to photograph it in this way. I do think the technical quality of this image is not great though. It's the same problem I see in your other interior photos: the textures are not sharp and it looks like too much noise reduction, which I don't understand really because at ISO 100, it should be free from noise and noise reduction shouldn't be necessary. Also, it looks like you didn't quite take the photo from the middle. You are slightly to the left of the centre. Livio, can I have a copy of the RAW file that you used to make this image? I'd really like to see whether the image quality is because of the camera, or because of the processing you use. If you are happy to let me see the RAW file, send me an email with the link to the file. Diliff (talk) 20:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • David, why don´t you keep your thoughts to yourself about my voting on nominations that are not yours? You have a nasty habit of contaminating other nominations that need not be contaminated. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it was in the context of a disagreement with you, and he didn't say that he only wanted an opinion on the image, so I took it to mean he wanted an opinion about the thread you and he were involved in. Diliff (talk) 08:13, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No,no I asked the David's opinion for your opinion: How is possible ask for another way for do a pictures of a church??? And more....all the church are similar? This do understand me that your knowledge of churches is somewhat limited, as is mine to the photos of quartered animals--LivioAndronico talk 08:55, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough, if the sidekick wants his masters opinion, so be it... And going back to the issue, which is the cookie cutter way in which churches are generally presented here. Yes, most catholic churches have the same layout design wise, especially medieval and renaissance churches. That style was exported to the american continent and can be seen throughout latin america in their different styles and interpretation of styles. However, I think that while the layout forces people to initially encounter the church due to the manner into which one enters the church, it always gives a generic point of view, the visual encounter becomes rather boring, for it becomes a repetitive pattern of perspective, etc. To photograph a church interior from this point of view, while providing a familiar look, it becomes too familiar and a run of the mill image, regardless of the craftsmanship needed to photograph the subject. In your particular case, the challenge is not to replicate someone else´s style, for that spot has already been taken, but rather, to find a new interpretation of the same subject that shows the particular attributes of a generic subject. Without a doubt David´s images are unquestionably, in his style, the best images of church interiors around here (achieved despite the inherent dangers that lurk in those tourist attractions ;)) and he has set a very high bar for everyone else, myself incuded. So if I were to photograph genetic churches (generic in the way that basically obey to the same layout) I would not try to replicate what someone else is already doing, but to find a way to document the same generic building springing from its particularity or contribution to the arts. Now, insofar as you trying to learn clairvoyance from your master in the way of determining my understanding of things, try another tack, he is indeed a master craftsman in photography, but rather a poor clairvoyant. I do have an an understanding of churches, and not just their architectural elements, but also their history, their construction methods, the workers who built them, the symbolism present, their cultural role, etc., but I guess that is another issue. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 13:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. I've downloaded them and processed them as I would normally process my own images. I can see that there are some minor differences between your final image and mine. You seem to have applied a much stronger contrast on the image, and also a stronger sharpening effect. My image has a bit more detail visible of the wooden reredos behind the altar (not so dark) and the sharpening looks a bit more realistic in my image (I think). I also corrected the perspective a little bit better, so that the floor was not looking tilted, and I left a bit more of the ceiling which you cropped out (just my tastes, but maybe you didn't want so much of it). I've uploaded my version as a derivative of yours (hope you don't mind), so you can compare them directly. The difference is small but I think these small differences do improve the image quality. Diliff (talk) 22:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done King --LivioAndronico talk 06:34, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

edit

By Diliff
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Sky Garden - Workmen.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2015 at 16:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of workmen from Sky Garden
Discussion irrelevant to the FP candidate
      • What is the difference between suggesting an uncropped version and suggesting a further crop to be made? I don't see the problem, as long as they're requests and not demands. Diliff (talk) 08:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • The question you ask is not the issue. Laitche thinks the "color version" (i.e. the original) "should" be shown. So that's a demand, albeit a polite one. -- Colin (talk) 08:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • I didn't see it as a demand though. It comes down to (as per a conversation we had a while ago) the "I think" prefixing it. If you say 'you think' something should occur, you're saying that 'in your opinion, it would be best if...', not an authoritative 'you should do x!'. I don't see the problem with what he said, given some allowances for English not being his first language. I think the main reason 'requests' to crop are acceptable and normalised here is because it's easy (and legal under CC-BY-SA) to extrapolate a crop from an uploaded image and anyone can do it, but you can't extrapolate a colour image from a uploaded B&W image or 'uncrop' an image, so the control over this is solely with the original author. They're all equally deviations from the original creative intent though. Diliff (talk) 08:56, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • Wrt to your first sentence, you are simply wrong. But I have no interest in arguing further about language usage nor irrelevant aspects of what was merely an analogy. The conversation was between me and Latche and he appeared to understand just fine. Can we discuss images rather that words? -- Colin (talk) 09:36, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • Once again, you're taking an opinion and interpreting it as a statement of fact. It is not. You are simply wrong. Anyway, perhaps Laitche can clarify whether he thinks his comment was a demand or a request. And yes, of course we can discuss images. I'd quite like to in fact, but you chose to ignore the part of my reply that discussed images. Diliff (talk) 09:54, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                • For crying out loud, Diliff, would you just drop it. -- Colin (talk) 10:15, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Consider it dropped. I just think you've had a bit of a tantrum here and misunderstood Laitche. That's all I've been trying to say all along. Diliff (talk) 10:31, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                    • @Diliff: Yes, my comment is a request but I don't care if the creator don't want to do. And thanks, I believe I can testify myself, I think there are trillions types of personalities though actually there aren't trillions people on the earth... :) --Laitche (talk) 12:07, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                      • Thanks Laitche. That's what I thought. I wasn't trying to testify for you, I know you can do that for yourself. But that doesn't mean I can't also disagree with Colin about the claims he makes. And yes there are many personalities, but this was not an issue of opinion that we can all agree to disagree about. He said you were demanding (fact claim), I said I thought you weren't (my opinion), and then you said you weren't (confirmation). He was wrong, end of story really. Diliff (talk) 12:50, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)

Should verb used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions.[10].

Should verb the past tense of shall: used as an auxiliary verb to indicate that an action is considered by the speaker to be obligatory.[11]

Example 1: When Diliff finds himself having an argument about what someone wrote rather than the topic he should consider that his own initial interpretation of the wording may not be the only one that is valid, and that another interpretation may prove to be better fit.

Example 2: Laitche should take care to avoid the word "should" when making requests where he does not care about the response. The words "request" and "demand" are synonyms, with the latter having more insistence and obligation. When a request is modified by the word "should" it reasonable to interpret that as a demand, albeit one without urgency.

By saying "I think the color version should be shown in other versions" Laitche is saying he considers doing this to be an "obligation, duty, or correctness" on my part. That is not a mere request. And it is that that I objected to. I don't want to see another post on this candidate page that doesn't concern the qualities (or lack) of the image above. -- Colin (talk) 13:43, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose I don't find that the b & w does anything to enhance the viewers perception of the image and the reflections are distracting.--Fotoriety (talk) 00:39, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Good enough, different. Good composition. However, I would have shown more of the building on the right, separate it a bit from the basket. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree it would have been nice to get that separation. The workmen were slowly moving (up or down, can't remember) so I didn't get a lot of chance to try different arrangements. -- Colin (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral about composition a tourist is distracting for me and upper left wall? and the reflection as well, about quality a little not sharp and maybe a little noisy. --Laitche (talk) 06:03, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Laitche, you're pixel-peeping wrt sharpness and noise. Look at the rope or the stubble on the man's face, and remember the workmen are behind glass. Unlike a Diliff cathedral or just about any other picture you see on the internet, this is not downsized at all. The sharpness we see on many pictures at FP is an illusion. What you see here is just what images look like at normal size. What you think is noise is just textures, fabric and dirty windows. This image was taken at ISO 100 and not pushed. I don't mind comments about composition or distracting elements but please can we move on from picking apart, at pixel level and 100% magnification, an image that has not been downsized. It just makes people submit 5MP images to FP to avoid this sort of hassle. Unless, after downsizing to 5MP (say), you can still see noise or CA or an image still looks unsharp, then it has no real-world relevance at all, and just shows concern for the wrong aspects of the picture. -- Colin (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • The difference is that my downsampled images tend to be much sharper than this and much higher resolution, so they're not only sharper because they're downsampled. However, they're not the same style of photography and can't be directly compared and I agree that too much pixel peeping is a problem here. Diliff (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Tuxyso mentioned that Photos are a very subjective matter. in this nomination I agree with that opinion especially for the composition and about noise I wrote maybe so I'm not sure cause I've never seen the color version and reflection as well :) --Laitche (talk) 08:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • The endemic problem here is an over-focus on tiny objective "flaws" which are then (wrongly) subjectively regarded as worth opposing or (as above) worth mentioning (even with a "maybe"). It's a bad habit and makes FP look amateurish. -- Colin (talk) 09:25, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Umm, it's a bit sensitive problem, others may be misunderstanding my comment, maybe you too, I voted neutral because of composition-wise if this composition is my favorite, I would vote support despite if there are flaws. I think that depends on the voters, and you wrote "The scene isn't doing anything for me. Not FP" in this nomination, that "for me" means I don't know ( or care ) others. right? I think it's same. --Laitche (talk) 10:04, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ok, I get that you are neutral on the composition and that if you thought the picture was great that you'd over look the "flaws". My point is that these aren't "flaws" and I do wish FPC would stop pixel-peeping. It is an correctly focused photograph, taken with a high-quality lens/camera, at ISO 100 in daylight. Is "not downsized" a flaw? It is simply wrong to look at it 100% on a big monitor and claim it is "little not sharp and maybe a little noisy". The Japanese garden isn't comparable as subjective opinions about what images "work" is perfectly valid. Pixel peeping simply isn't. It is simply bad reviewing, and FP should work harder to avoid it. Please don't let us become as bad as QI seems to be with such nit picking. -- Colin (talk) 11:23, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • You might be a bit picky for the comments :) --Laitche (talk) 11:46, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                • Hmm. Well I'm consistent on this, no matter who creates or nominates the picture. I've campaigned against pixel-peeping comments at FPC for years, and don't plan on stopping. Hopefully it has an effect over time. If nobody complains then it just appears that such review comments are acceptable. And they absolutely aren't. Next time you find yourself reviewing a downsized 5MP FP candidate, that looks sharp and noiseless, consider whether it is you, Laitche, who prevented Commons from getting a 36MP instead. Because there are several nominators with 24/36MP cameras who do just that, and Commons is the worse for it. -- Colin (talk) 11:56, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Thanks, Colin, for a somewhat different candidate. Keenly observed and well taken --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Not good but very good, even more...-- Christian Ferrer 10:58, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment. I do think that compositionally, it's awkward. I suppose you only had a moment to compose the shot, but I think it would have been stronger if you got a bit closer, more to the right side and lower so that the window bar was out of the frame at the top, or at least above the top of the Shard. There's a bit too much sky for my liking. Diliff (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Excellent composition, nice effects. :) --Tremonist (talk) 14:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support This is the kind of photo that makes you think. I like the reflections on the workers and the overall balance of the elements of composition. B&W was a good idea here; maybe the woman was wearing a bright red sweater which would have distracted the viewer's attention, or perhaps the sky was an unattractive pastel blue. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Hubertl (talk) 07:49, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Strong composition. I think its a great photo--ArildV (talk) 13:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC).[reply]
  •  Support Something different --· Favalli ⟡ 02:30, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:44, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:All Saints Margaret Street Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 01:26:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

All Saints Margaret Street Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •  Info Another overwhelming picture of Diliff with 180 megapixels, uploaded by Diliff - nominated by -- The Photographer (talk) 01:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- The Photographer (talk) 01:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support. Thanks for the nomination. It's quite a spectacular church and worth viewing at 100% for the amazing detail (if it doesn't crash your browser!). :-) Diliff (talk) 01:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Yes The Photographer, wow. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:07, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support amazing! 140 pictures were taken to make this. Even with a high quality panoramic plate, that takes patience (not to mention the dedication of visiting many churches to document such beautiful artwork and architecture). The only way this picture could have been improved was to use focus stacking to get all the chairs in focus. Just kidding. Minor point: in the image description, the lens is stated as the Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM which is ambiguous and can be interpreted as the inferior Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens instead of the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art which I think you used. dllu (t,c) 07:54, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Even more confusing actually, I copied and pasted the template from another image I used it on, and adjusted all the exposure values but forgot to change the lens details, it was actually the Canon 85mm f/1.8 lens that I used on this image. I'll fix it now. And you know, I've even thought about focus stacking my interiors, but it's unfortunately completely impractical because there's no way to automate it. I could use Magiclantern which has autofocus stepper-based focus stacking but as far as I know, you can't combine that with exposure bracketing for the HDR side of things. And I'd rather keep the HDR than unlimited DoF to be honest. Diliff (talk) 08:58, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support — Julian H.✈ 09:09, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support WoW --LivioAndronico talk 09:33, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Pofka (talk) 10:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I've been wowed. --Laitche (talk) 10:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I resized to .75 and check details, all was there. No need to such huge file, unless will be banner for the crusade. Look at that simple bird above, equals to 67 of those kind of photos. Now if all will start this, we will be soon limited with space. --Mile (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure if you were joking or serious, but the file size/resolution is useful. There's 100% detail in every pixel in focus. Downsizing the image will remove detail from the image. Maybe you don't mind to lose detail, and that's fine, but the highest resolution image should be maintained because we don't know how this image could be used in the future. Also, nobody is saying that just because I took a high resolution image that everyone else should now follow. Diliff (talk) 15:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia mostly, maybe. But what if in 50 years time, someone makes a documentary about churches and wants to show what the church looked in 2015 like on their 20k wall-sized TV? This image would be freely licensed and there would probably be nothing else in the world as good as it. We can't always imagine how these images could be used in the future. Limiting them just because it takes too long to download is quite short-sighted. Diliff (talk) 15:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now you're talking about the future, you should think in upload your RAWs files to commonsarchive in 50 years time (2055) and taking a positive view of humanity is not yet self-destructed, when we leave this world, these images RAWs be there, and perhaps a new technology could get them capture sounds. --The Photographer (talk) 11:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Each panorama I take would be 1.5gb to 2gb of RAW files.... That would take 4 hours to upload with my broadband... It's not really worth it, I think. Maybe when my internet is faster. ;-) Diliff (talk) 12:23, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you place it in a in the cloud (could be dropbox also with a password that you can give me), I would handle it up requesting a mass upload. I recommend not to save RAWs on the hard drive, three years ago I lost 500 GB of RAWs in this way, a hard disk is damaged (Samsung HD). I spent some months depressed because they are pictures that will never return. Something similar happened to Poco a poco with his stolen camera. --The Photographer (talk) 13:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is still uploading all my files. I have more than 3 terabytes of RAW files at the moment. That would take about 4 months if I left my computer uploading 24/7 every single day and it would affect the speed of everything else too. And no service would let me store that many files without charging me a lot of money Cloud backup of that many files isn't practical. I'm actually in the process of building a RAID NAS server to backup my data. Last year, I had a hard drive crash and I lost every photo I took from 2001 to 2009 too, so I know what it's like. Diliff (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "3 terabytes of RAW files at the moment" => You dont need upload all this, just this file for begin.
  • "no service would let me store that many files without charging me a lot of money" => commons archive is free!!!
  • "I'm actually in the process of building a RAID NAS" => With fifth the price of that, you could pay a gigabit connection only a month to raise all that in commons archive.
I hope you never matter what happened to me, however, I more never in my life will spend money buying any hard disk. Just imagine that today a problem of light damage your hard drive, just think about it for a second --The Photographer (talk) 16:19, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I already did experience what happened to you, as I said above... But you can have a reliable backup with hard drives. You just need to have more than one copy, that's all That's what the NAS is for. Yes, maybe I could upload just the RAW files but to send a real back up of all my DSLR RAW files to the cloud, it would definitely take 4 months with my current ADSL2+. I couldn't get a gigabit connection for only a month, I would need to sign a contract for at least 12 months because nobody (at least in the UK) will set up a new internet connection for just one month. Also, no residential broadband company evens offers 1gbit internet in the UK! the fastest residential broadband is only 150mbit and I'm pretty sure business fibre broadband is actually going to be a lot more expensive than 1/5th of the cost of a NAS even for just the installation, not to mention the monthly costs. Also, the RAID NAS would have other purposes, not just a backup. And Commons Archive only lets you upload source files for images on Commons, but not all my RAW files are for Commons images. I can't be bothered to figure out which RAW files are used for images on Commons and which are not. It would take days and days to do that. It's just not worth it. A NAS is much simpler. All files are backed up and accessible to me in seconds if I have a hard drive failure. :-) Diliff (talk) 17:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commons is not just for Wikipedia. It is rather naive to assume the only way to look at such a large image is at 100% in a web browser, or printed on some huge canvas. Sadly the Zoom Browser seems to be broken more than it is working these days, but such interactive viewers are really the best way to explore and appreciate an image such as this. Hopefully soon, Wikimedia will support 360-degree panorama viewers, which are an engaging and natural way to study such a large 3D space. Knowing that Diliff's panoramas are already downsized, I simply don't believe that a further 75% reduction can be made without significant loss of fine detail. -- Colin (talk) 21:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Berdorf (LU), Hohllay -- 2015 -- 6097-101.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 11:54:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hohllay (“hollow rock”) in Berdorf, Luxembourg
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:06, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2015 at 22:43:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Inahamne Lake, Osmussaar, Estonia

Alternative

edit

By Kruusamägi (talk) 14:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:03, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 21:44:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Camera conceived and built by Albrecht Meydenbauer
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:04, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 09:43:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal stairs in Palazzo Farnese (Caprarola)
It's called scale directed otherwise I would have called the "royal steps". The paintings on the right were a little spoiled ... are always of the 1600. Regards.--LivioAndronico talk 14:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This colors are a bit different from former version and I've never seen the real subject and also don't know it was reprocessed from the raw or just changed the color space therefore I am not sure which colors are correct... But every viewer is showing the same colors surely. I believe only you know the real colors. (p.s. The data is saying OK of course.) --Laitche (talk) 20:54, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:08, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 18:02:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mazel Street. Olargues, Hérault, France
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:09, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 19:56:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Sky Garden
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 11:10, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 21:39:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Earth, Moon and Lunar Module

Alternative

edit

Earth, Moon and Lunar Module


Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /The Photographer (talk) 19:37, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Space exploration
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2015 at 15:40:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

dome of church in Villa Farnese at Caprarola
Now you ask me too much Laitche,I don't know use PNG --LivioAndronico talk 17:11, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I made the PNG file (transparent background) instead of you and nominated the alternative. --Laitche (talk) 10:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
File:Kopfschuettel.gif--LivioAndronico talk 19:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
White background is not disturbing because I think this is very good for the DVD label of your photos album... --Laitche (talk) 22:40, 10 June 2015 (UTC) Sorry, bad joke. --Laitche (talk) 07:49, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

edit

dome of church in Villa Farnese at Caprarola

Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:45, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Koblenz - Panorama von Festung Ehrenbreitstein.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2015 at 21:03:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Festung Ehrenbreitstein at Koblenz
I just made a downscale, no further sharpening in this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I reconsidered and changed my opinion to contra because of the wrong light and bad colour balance. --Schaengel (talk) 16:49, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No surprise because of your personal motivated behaviour, also here visible. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:51, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look at the colour balance, but it't not wrong in general. IMO here is at most a moderate correction necessary. The small black line I'll correct soon, not a big deal. Schaengel: for sure a morning mood image is very often nice. But we have not bad light conditions here. Everythink is visible well and there are not disturbing shadows. The light is very strong so that the scenery is very distincted. So in my opinion it's not to late. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:14, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alt???
Alt???
I'm not a friend of de-noising an image where it isn't necessary. Did you really think the sky is disturbing? --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Hmm, not so disturbing but if you can fix it, that would be better :) --Laitche (talk) 19:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I am not convinced with this pano. Two aspects are distracting: there are strange artefacts on the sky, often appearing if you do relatively extreme highlight / shadow correction or if you do manual corrections (e.g. saturation) on one color channel (e.g. blue). But imho this artefacts can be easily fixed with a local denoising / unsharpening. I am also no big fan of excessive global NR, but local corrections on the sky are mandatory here. Second point: the light is far from being optimal. Most facades of the buildings are in unfortunate shadow whereas very bright sunlight comes from the side and touches the roofs and leads to near overexposed areas on it. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Posterized sky, oversharpened in the center. Nice subject, even better with slightly more space towards the bottom. — Julian H.✈ 21:01, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Posterized sky, even visible with a downsampling of 50% -- Christian Ferrer 15:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nice composition but per others (including Tuxyso). --Laitche (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2015 at 21:27:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Icelandic horses in Búlandshöfði, Vesturland, Iceland.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 16:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Koblenz - Basilika St. Kastor Westfassade.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 09:16:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

West facade of St Castor, Koblenz
I guess this contra is because Schaengel is miffed because I have replaced his one File:Koblenz im Buga-Jahr 2011 - Basilika St Kastor 02.jpg (discussion about that, (only in German)). Very sad and poor that Schaengel has no objective arguments concerning the photographic aspects but only act personal and offended. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Infact Schaengel,can you explain the reasons for your opposition? Here we motivate our judgments, thanks --LivioAndronico talk 15:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect he is not willing to answer, he also reverted my statement. So he just gives his emotions full scope. --84.174.235.23 15:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC) Forgotten to login --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:33, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The colour of the church doesn´t match with the original. It is over processed. --Schaengel (talk) 15:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The intense colour is due to evening sunset light. What exactly is overprocessed in your opinion? --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To me it does not seem Schaengel, however, can you give me an example of photos of the same subject not overprocessed? Thanks --LivioAndronico talk 16:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is how the church looks like in real File:Castorkirche in Koblenz.jpg. Taking the photo at the wrong time, with the wrong sun light, is also a cause for a contra. --Schaengel (talk) 16:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ok Schaengel,thanks for your explain --LivioAndronico talk 20:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why is sun light here the wrong time? Your advise on this candidate was exactly to take this image at morning sunset. So why is intense light for Koblenz Panorama okay but not for an building? I can assure that there is not falsification of the building colours. Schaengels arguments has obviously other motivations. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2015 (UTC) P.S. very funny indeed is "wrong sun light". I guess correct sun light can only be captured by Schaengel himself.[reply]
 Info Schaengel reverts all replacements in all wikipedias worldwide. He seem to declares articels of Koblenz to his property because he is living there. His comprehension of perfect illustration to the Basilica of St. Castor seems to look like this. Images (File:Koblenz_im_Buga-Jahr_2011_-_Basilika_St_Kastor_01.jpg and File:Koblenz_im_Buga-Jahr_2011_-_Basilika_St_Kastor_02.jpg) with poor sharpness, distorted towers and disturbing elements in the foreground seem to meet his appreciation of quality. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:34, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is in fact, I have put some vertical and horizontal lines to proof this. Please consider, that this building is really old and not everything is 100% straight. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I thought so! The building is old and not everything is straight there, but your photo is. Congratulations! --Tremonist (talk) 16:17, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An earlier sun would have the consequence of hard shadow which is often criticized other way. The little perspective correction will be corrected soon. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • temp.  Oppose distorted. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The sky is brighter near the roof and the trees, causing the appearance of a subtle "glow" which is distracting and especially noticeable at smaller sizes or thumbnails. This is probably the consequence of some kind of tone mapping or "details" slider in Adobe raw converter. I don't that is necessary here since the dynamic range in the scene is not that big and the photo is very sharp anyway. Dllu (talk) 08:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly I can't detect the effect of glowing as a disturbing element. The image is not a HDR but has simply got an adjustment of the color curve. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:03, 12 June 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Actually it is a thin cloud in the sky behind the left tower. It also somewhat distracted me when I saw the picture for the first time. At first glance it resembles a halo that may be caused by image processing. --Blutgretchen (talk) 21:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC) [reply]
I'm not talking about the thin cloud; I can see it around the right tower too, as well as near the trees. (I also checked the colours with GIMP to make sure my eyes aren't tricking me) Anyway, it is not a big deal at all, and it is not grounds for opposing. dllu (t,c) 00:18, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here, I adjusted the brightness and contrast and used the threshold tool to more clearly show the effect: [12][13][14] As I said, it is not a big deal, just distracting to some people (like me). dllu (t,c) 00:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 16:08, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Germany
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 05:22:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bagnas National Nature Reserve
 Weak support Fixed just enough, although you could probably get away with cropping a bit out on the right. Daniel Case (talk) 05:18, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 16:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 07:47:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 16:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adorazione dei Magi by Gentile da Fabriano - Predella.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 20:50:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Adorazione dei Magi by Gentile da Fabriano - Predella
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 08:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 20:00:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sand lizard female
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 08:29, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles

File:MT-55 Militärtag - Uffenheim - 2015 .jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 21:15:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

MT-55-Brückenlegegerät
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meister von Seitenstetten - Maria Verkündigung.JPG, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 13:51:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Info @PetarM: It is the original crop. --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Hafspajen: Please sign your vote correctly!--Uoaei1 (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Uoaei1: .. my signature looks like this, it always did on commons... no idea why. But it doesn't bother me. Not here, not the way it bothered me when they didn't wanted to link my name at Singpost. That was nasty. --Hafspajen 22:40, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 08:28, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2015 at 21:16:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Passeier Valley photographed from Kuens with heading to Meran
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 4 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Balaenoptera physalus skeleton - Salinas del Carmen.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2015 at 13:07:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skeleton of a Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), Salinas del Carmen, Fuerteventura, Canary Islands
Upon further review it may just have been a byproduct of looking at this image with my reading glasses on. However, the unsharpness remains and the whole thing still looks a little overprocessed to me. Daniel Case (talk) 16:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:04, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 12:41:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Suwałki Landscape Park. Podlaskie Voivodeship, Poland
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Panorama of the courtyard of the Great Mosque of Kairouan.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 12:34:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of the courtyard of the Great Mosque of Kairouan (in Tunisia).
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: per above comments on the sky. --KTC (talk) 18:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 13:28:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Milickie Ponds Nature Reserve. Barycz Valley Landscape Park. Lower Silesian Voivodeship, Poland
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2015 at 16:55:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:St Paul's Cathedral Interior Dome 3, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 09:48:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:12, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Chehel Sotoun Inside, Isfahan Edit1.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 10:08:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: sorry, but wrong license, only: GFDL 1.2 only - Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:29, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:King's College London Chapel 2, London - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 11:36:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The interior of King's College London Chapel
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 05:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
Result: 11 replace, 3 keep → replaced?/Laitche (talk) 05:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Replaced alternative is File:King's College London Chapel, London, UK - Diliff.jpg?[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 12:14:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cliff flycatcher (Hirundinea ferruginea) in Pindamonhagaba, Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 08:49:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:36, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 10:38:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Northern gate of Basilica San Marco in Venice

Alternative

edit
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 15:53:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
@Famberhorst: I think they are saying about the composition, not about the element of the blue border... --Laitche (talk) 16:18, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment That was the problem ; is it sea, or is it sky ? Should be wider, or it shouldt be at all. Its very annoying to guess what is it, feels like 5th element there. --Mile (talk) 18:04, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:2013 Australian Open - Guillaume Rufin.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2015 at 06:33:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Australian Open - Guillaume Rufin
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2015 at 18:32:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brewery in Radków
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Industry

File:Augustów - Jezioro Białe (by Pudelek).jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2015 at 18:27:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Augustów Lake, Poland

Alternative

edit

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2015 at 19:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winter landscape of St Coloman church (de), located in Schwangau, Bavaria, south of Germany. St Coloman church is of baroque style and was constructed, the way it is today, in the 17th century in honor to Saint Coloman, replacing a chapel of the 15th century. The irish pilgrim is said to have taken a break at this spot in his pilgrimage to the Holy Land in 1012.
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2015 at 16:14:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lüübnitsa village coast in southeast Estonia
 Comment Indeed, that is interesting. I'll try it soon. Kruusamägi (talk) 13:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2015 at 15:23:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The brown-eared bulbul after playing with water.
@Mile： Twice? You mean extender? If so I think 185mm is correct (it's not 370mm), I don't know why that is not an even number... --Laitche (talk) 11:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
wow! --Laitche (talk) 21:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:49, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes

File:Negotiations about Iranian Nuclear Program - the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Other Officials of the P5+1 and Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Iran and EU in Lausanne.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 11:21:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 16:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 11:35:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Staircase of Palace Altemps
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 19:37:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sculpture "Man walking to the sky" in Kassel, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 22:05, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 20:03:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mustoja Nature Park
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 13:22:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Spechtensee near Wörschachwald, Styria
 Info @Pofka: New version uploaded, where I have brightened the dark parts on the left a little - but not too much to preserve these early morning lighting conditions. --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Laitche: Where? Please add a note. --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Uoaei1: It's about but I added a note. --Laitche (talk) 20:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was not windy at this time. I rather guess my lens does not show the very best contrast in this area. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:14, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

*  Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:56, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 02:04:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Well, your prerrogative to oppose, but nature shots are a bit different than tourist attaction pictures that we see often around here. I challenge you to find more intimate pictures of boat billed heron chicks, and you can start here #REDIRECT[[15]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:14, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • In some nature shots one has to maintain a distance that minimizes the stress that humans cause on wildlife. Chick pictures are extremely stressful on the mothers and I choose close enough for good enough and fast enough in order to dissapear from their life and still come out with something that is illustrative of their environment. Once one gets this close, for spotting the nests in thick mangroves is much more challenging than taking the picture itself, one could really come inches away from the nests and really be on top and take that great shot up close, but paradoxically, one would miss out of the "disturbing" elements that give an idea of how the birds hide their nests, not differentiating the wild picture from the zoo picture. In any case, I choose the least intrusive shot. Closer is not necessarily better. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:33, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per LivioAndronico. These leafs are really disturbing. It was done not in a correct angle. Maybe you have any other versions? -- Pofka (talk) 16:33, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I really don´t want to lecture but.... Photography Evaluation depends on many criteria, such as technical aspects, content, relevance, ethics, etc. One does not evaluate all photographs the same way. For example, you do not apply still photography criteria to sports or nature photography. There may be some overlaping criteria, such as exposure, composition, etc., but their uniqueness within a certain class of photography demands variable criteria. In this particular case, as far as the "distracting elements," they need to be addressed in order to properly determine the overall quality of the photograph. Mangroves have very thick foilage at the top and at the edges and visibility in these parts is next to nothing, depending on where you are with respect to the edge of the mangrove, visibility is next to nothing. In this image, for example, we can get a little bit of scale and an idea of visibility at the outer side of the mangrove #REDIRECT[[16]] you cannot see through on the left part of the image, and that particular outcropping of vegetation could not have been more than a yard and a hal thick. Once you get inside the canopy, visibility improves a a little, but still there is visual caos because of reflections and vegetation. See here #REDIRECT[[17]]. The thickest parts are on the canopy or the edges, and because of the cover they offer, that is where birds nest. In this picture #REDIRECT[[18]] we can appreciate that the nest is well hidden behind leaves and branches, and although we can see the bird, the nest is hidden from view. What I do when I spot a nest, is to look for view tunnels in the brush from where I can look into the nest without cutting a single branch, so obstructing branches are inevitable, like here, for example #REDIRECT[[19]]. The view tunnels are very narrow. I could actually reach the nest and touch the chicks if I wanted, but that would be a very disturbing intrusion, for the birds stress out a lot with human presence, so I maintain my distance. So the merit of this photograph resides not only on the technical quality such as exposure, composition and focus, but on the fact that is of a wildlife subject, in its undisturbed environment. It is not only the picture of a chick, but also of its environment. They go together. From the ethical point of view, the disturbing is also a consideration. Even getting to the distance from where I shoot can be questionable. Some well respected bird watching organizations for example, do not publish photographs of nests or chicks because of this unwelcome intrusion. I deal with that intrusion by maintaining a distance and not touching the surrounding vegetation, and getting out of there as soon as possible. In short, in mangroves, imposible to have clear views, however, the mangrove is part of the show... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:29, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose All the same, I don't see any wow. Daniel Case (talk) 17:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question @ Daniel Case, What is wow? A prolific contributor like you #[[20]] surely has better arguments. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Subject has very big wow of course, but at prewiew composition have not and the blurred leave in foreground right is disturbing. At full resolution the light on the bird is not the best. Valuable image, wow subject but no wow result despite the difficulty of making this kind of nature picture. -- Christian Ferrer 19:08, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral I like the little bird, of course, but the picture has too many blurred areas. I'm not talking about the right part that doesn't disturb me so much, but more about the lower part of the foreground. The bird itself is lovely. --Tremonist (talk) 12:45, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 09:13, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2015 at 22:30:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Detail of red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) roots at Abrolhos Islands.
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 09:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 23:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stanford Oval and Main Quad
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 09:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 09:27:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Early morning view of the Old Town of Dubrovnik and its city walls, an UNESCO Heritage Site since 1979. The former Republic of Ragusa was a maritime republic centered on the city of Dubrovnik (Ragusa in Italian and Latin) in Dalmatia (today in southernmost modern Croatia), that existed from 1358 (end of the sovereignty of Venice) to 1808 (conquered by Napoleon's French Empire). It reached its commercial peak in the 15th and the 16th centuries, under the protection of the Ottoman Empire. It had a population of about 30,000 people, of whom 5,000 lived within the city walls.
 Comment An Al di Meola fan? Daniel Case (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Château de Rochefort-en-Terre (Vierge - détail).jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 11:18:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:King's College London Chapel 3, London - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 11:33:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

King's College London Chapel 3, London - Diliff.jpg
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:13, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 09:44:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 06:31:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Siegestor in Munich, Germany, at night

Alternative

edit
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 10:01:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gate of all nations in Persepolis
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:18, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunset at Noronhas' beach.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2015 at 08:52:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: The nominating guidelines say "almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others -- Colin (talk) 11:27, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
  •  I withdraw my nomination 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:50, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I was just about to contest the fpx and support out of principle. While the guideliness do state as Colin says, guidelines are not rules, and in any case, the same logic could be applied to just about any recurring theme here, church interiors for example. I think that the fpx should be applied to violations of rules or other issues that prevent the image use. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tomascastelazo, in general, I'm inclined to agree about FPX. But I was concerned that this is the second low-resolution sunset photo on the FPC page and a trend may be starting to just nominate any pretty sunset. They'll always garner a handful of supports, as so many people don't actually look at the category to see that if this is featurable then so are about 10,000 other photos. -- Colin (talk) 17:34, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spot-billed duck, Nagai Park.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2015 at 21:56:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spot-billed duck in sunlight filtering through trees.
I know ・・・ ▓▒░ --Laitche (talk) 09:46, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

edit

Spot-billed duck in sunlight filtering through trees.

File:Amiens Cathedral Ambulatory, Picardy, France - Diliff.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 18:27:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amiens Cathedral Ambulatory
  •  Support @Daniel Case, one can see a british flag too. Please see here:Battle of Amiens (1918). In all the cathedrals of northern France, one can find a memorial plate to the deaths of british, and british empire or dominions troops, always the same. @ Diliff, don't worry about Tomas' opposes, I find here some silver lining: your picture will stay here longer, and admirated by more visitors, as not affected by the 10 days rule ! Yes, the distortion is disturbing a little, but the stained glass windows are axcellent, and the peaceful light really good. The "deformed" pillars are not very visible.--Jebulon (talk) 17:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jebulon: Yeah, I see it now ... it's just rolled up tighter and in more shadow than the other two. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jebulon: It would be nice for you to keep your advise to David as to how to deal with my vote in his nomination, or at least do it privately if you are concerned about his emotional well being. Funny thing that you patronize him (some people call it ass kissing) but you did not afford me the courtesy of answering my polite questions on your oppose in one of my nominations. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:01, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No need of an answer, of course. A precision: I did not comment any vote here. I just noticed the factual consequences of a vote.--Jebulon (talk) 09:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sure... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:48, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Wat Chedi Luang Assembly Hall, Chiang Mai, Thailand - Diliff.jpg, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2015 at 18:20:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wat Chedi Luang
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •  Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. Although this photo of Wat Chedi Luang in Chiang Mai, Thailand is not one of my high resolution stitched interiors taken on a tripod (I didn't have the opportunity to use a tripod and I think it would probably be a bit disrespectful during a ceremony anyway), I think it has quite a lot of charm and is a well-composed and intimate portrait of a Theravada Buddhist ceremony. It was taken hand-held in very poor lighting (1/15th of a second at f/3.5 and ISO 2000). This is not an excuse, just an explanation, and I hope you can appreciate the compositional aspects of it if not the technical superiority, but please judge it as you want. :-) -- Diliff (talk) 18:20, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Diliff (talk) 18:20, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support but a little bit disturbing top. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:47, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Distracting top foreground. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:19, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Given image, distraction is minor. -- Christian Ferrer 04:29, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support per Christian --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:50, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment It can be resolved as handheld made. Hard task, maybe better described if you say i was more than one stop bellow limit (according to 1/f rule), f ans ISO itself are irrelevant. Not long ago, i put image with 2.5 stops bellow limit, which was very good, nobody show up, perhaps nobody did understand hardness to achieve it. All i get was minus and advice "Why dont you use tripod... you could ask for permission". I dont expect all could understand, but obviously even those who get the situation didnt say any word. --Mile (talk) 08:13, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Camera settings are not irrelevant here, they show that there was little I could do to adjust the settings for a better image because I was at the limit for aperture, shutter speed and ISO. I know it's not always possible to ask permission to use a tripod, and I wouldn't insist you must use one. I don't know that a tripod would be better in any case. These people were chanting, they were not completely still. A tripod would keep the building sharp, but it would completely fail to keep the monks sharp, only a fast shutter speed would do that, but a fast shutter speed was simply impossible in this room. Diliff (talk) 22:11, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose This is the first time I'm opposing your picture, but this one undoubtedly has problems. These blurred triangles at the top are just too distracting. Cropping them would result in losing of a part of the altar, so I guess fixing this picture issues are impossible. -- Pofka (talk) 11:34, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • No problem. I just don't think the flags at the top are such an issue though. They are part of the building interior, yes they are out of focus but they are not so important that they must be sharp. I agree with you that cropping it is not the answer. I could use Photoshop to remove them perhaps, but I'm not sure it's needed. I'll have a think about it. Diliff (talk) 16:20, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I believe it would look much better without them. If that is possible - try to remove them with photoshop. But is that really possible? Some of these flags are way too long and covers some parts of the altar fragments... -- Pofka (talk) 19:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support There's no need to give the top foreground so much weight; most probably, the perspective would just have been impossible from a different position. What the picture mainly shows, the altar with the monks in front, is really impressive. --Tremonist (talk) 13:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Out of focus flags are distracting and have no purpose in the composition. I would remove them in post.--Fotoriety (talk) 07:09, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose And not the first time I've opposed one of David's images, although I think this is the first time I've done so where you nominated it yourself. The flags on top might not be a problem if they were the only issue. But frankly the monks, the putative subject of the image, are kind of dark and static, allowing the banners to distract from them. Perhaps if the image had been cropped to them ... but then you would have had to lose a lot of the backdrop. Daniel Case (talk) 16:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think this image could be achieved any other way to be honest. I could possibly have gotten a little bit closer to them which would have given me a view that avoided the flags completely, but the aperture was already very wide, I couldn't increase the exposure without the monks becoming motion blurred. I don't think the monks feel static though, they are very much 'alive'. Dark perhaps, but that's the point. It's a dark and intimate environment. There are a few beams of light reaching them from the outside but they are largely unlit. The two candles are bright enough to light the faces of the monks near them which gives you an idea of the luminosity of the room. I suppose I have a difference understanding of the scene, having been there. They were chanting at the time. I took a large number of photos of this scene because it was at the very edge of hand-holdability and most of the frames were a bit blurred, either from hand-shake or because the monks had moved slightly. The fact that I was able to capture everything reasonably sharply is a minor miracle in itself IMO. It just doesn't feel static at all to me. But I respect your oppose, I certainly wouldn't say you support all my images blindly either and I understand that some subjects are just inherently difficult to capture to FP level. Diliff (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who believe that Diliff's work would not be featured!!!  Oppose ... --Laitche (talk) 18:44, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It wouldn't be the first Laitche. :-) I've had many fail before. Sometimes I nominate images that I think are more challenging (like this one) simply because I get a bit bored of nominating churches. And I think others get bored too. But I still think this one is better than some church interiors that have passed. Diliff (talk) 18:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I guess you are forgetting that how you are talented! I think this work is not enough for your talent and the result is not all. I believe that you can still enjoy for every thing (yes, I got a bit bored of churches too...), church interiors are only the part of you :) --Laitche (talk) 18:55, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Agree with the comments about the top crop. Furthermore, it is also a pity that the monks, are mostly in shadow resulting in an unbalanced picture to me. Poco2 16:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ema no Pantanal.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2015 at 16:48:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Poor quality. - Laitche (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Souq Waqif, Doha, Catar, 2013-08-05, DD 77.JPG

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2015 at 18:32:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Late evening shot of a wind tower in Souq Waqif, a souq in the Mushayrib district of Doha, capital of Qatar. Transliterated to "the standing market," Souq Waqif, is a former livestock market from end of 19th century / beginning of the 20th century, and has become today a popular place with all kind of shops, restaurants and Shisha lounges.

File:Temple of Saturn in Fori Imperiali at Night.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2015 at 14:00:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Temple of Saturn in Fori Imperiali at Night
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2015 at 20:24:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kollhoff-Tower and Bahn-Tower, Potzdamer Platz
National Intelligence Estimates? --Laitche (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, no, I meant nice work Poco2 12:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 12:04, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Erdbeerfeld -- 2015 -- 6492-6.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2015 at 16:18:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Strawberry field in the hamlet Dernekamp, Kirchspiel, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 12:01, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2015 at 20:01:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Little egret (Taken at Keitakuen.)
@ArionEstar: I was watching this exhibition ten minutes before I took this photo, I might be inspired... I believe you cannot read Japanese but you can look at the pictures :) --Laitche (talk) 21:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Mile：Thanks for the suggestion I've executed -EV on highlights white and ✓ uploaded new version, I tried some crop but I prefer this. --Laitche (talk) 10:34, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Christian： It's a work including the empty background like this :) --Laitche (talk) 12:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Support In any case, nothing is unbalanced with the current version. It's very well done. I am always impressed when I see this species by the contrast between the terrible and ruthless eyes of this predator about to pounce on its prey, with white and silky feathers. -- Christian Ferrer 18:14, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Pugilist: No, but if you (or anyone) nominate the other crop as alternative, I don't mind :) --Laitche (talk) 18:51, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 12:02, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2015 at 16:53:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nymphaea odorata ssp. tuberosa
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Antiguo Mercado de la Victoria, Puebla, México, 2013-10-11, DD 01.JPG

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2015 at 18:08:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glas dome of the old Victoria market, old city of Puebla de Zaragoza, Mexico. The market, built in 1914 in honor to Guadalupe Victoria was one of the last wrought iron constructions in Mexico.

File:Biebrza in Wroceń.JPG

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 08:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

National Park Biebrza in Wroceń, Poland
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2015 at 12:10:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rogalin Landscape Park. Greater Poland Voivodeship, Poland
Confirmed results:
Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Schwäbisch Hall - Rathaus.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2015 at 14:29:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schwäbisch Hall rathaus (City hall). Baden-Württemberg, Germany.
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2015 at 18:37:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bear Cave in Kletno (Lower Silesia, Poland), stalactites
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:19, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2015 at 14:47:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

view over the lake Dobbertiner See
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:22, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2015 at 18:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Papilio machaon larva
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2015 at 14:27:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beach chairs at sunrise
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jul 2015 at 19:51:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vinnytsia state academic music drama theatre
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2015 at 13:08:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ágnes Szávay at the 2009 French Open
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:18, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bloemenweide aan rand van boomwal. Locatie, Natuurterrein De Famberhorst 02.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2015 at 16:40:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Olargues railway bridge, Hérault 01.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 11:12:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olargues railway bridge, Hérault, France
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 07:08:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset at lake Stortjärnen.
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 02:13:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Support Well, the name should not be the criteria to judge the picture. I think that it could be a bit brigther but still this one deserves the star to me for the good quality. Poco2 15:29, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 08:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles

File:Leonardo da Vinci - presumed self-portrait - lossless.png, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 14:45:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leonardo da Vinci - presumed self-portrait
I find one of the most impressive things about the image is the way you can really see his pencil-work, changing the contrast could potentially obscure some of the shading. This may not be an ideal image for low-resolution viewing, which is why I haven't nominated it on Wikipedia. CFCF (talk) 13:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is lossless, I would have uploaded a tiff aswell, but that has no compression at all which would give a filesize over 200mb. Jpg is a lossy format, and with an image of this resolution even with as little jpeg-style compression as possible you can see the difference very clearly. CFCF (talk) 15:01, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 08:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 20:39:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A noontime rest for a full-fledged assembly worker at the Long Beach, Calif., plant of Douglas Aircraft Company
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:27, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jul 2015 at 19:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asymmetric view of the principal façade of the Buckingham Palace, the London residence and principal workplace of the monarchy of the United Kingdom. The palace, located in the City of Westminster, was originally constructed by Edward Blore and completed in 1850. The current appearance is the result of a remodelling by Sir Aston Webb in 1913.
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 08:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Waldbillig (LU), Schiessentümpel -- 2015 -- 6020.jpg, featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 05:44:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schiessentümpel at the Black Ernz near Waldbillig, Luxembourg
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 08:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2015 at 21:04:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Zhou Fang. Court Ladies Playing Double sixes
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 07:26, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jul 2015 at 20:50:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Window in Convent of Saint Elizabeth in Nysa
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 04:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Jean-Léon Gérôme - Head of a Woman.png, not featured

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2015 at 13:20:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Tête de femme coiffée de corne de bélier"
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 22:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4 LB834.jpg

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 23:11:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4 LB834

 I withdraw my nomination Yann (talk) 07:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2015 at 11:41:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Galloway cattle
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2015 at 12:10:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View to Rio de Janeiro city from Niterói - RJ, Brazil.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 17:23, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/June_2015&oldid=197455767"