Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 21 2023

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Kodak_Brownie_127.jpg

[edit]

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Speedcube_GAN.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Stickerless GAN 356 RS 3x3 speedcube, view from blue-orange side. --多多123 18:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry, noisy and some CAs --Mike Peel 20:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
    • I will try to fix the issues. --多多123 20:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
    • I don't see where it's noisy? The CA is just on the left side of the blue, the rest is the color of the other side blending in. --多多123 20:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
    • There's no noise IMO, the texture is like that on the cube and the table is also very "noisy" as well as the wall behind, but you can add annotations on the image if you can see any noise. --多多123 21:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:31, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

File:SGH-L760.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Samsung Ted Baker SGH-L760 in coral pink. --多多123 21:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 22:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I think the picture would be more useful if it was turned to the right so that the phone was facing the right way. If necessary, perspective or exposure would have to be corrected. But as it is, not much can be done with it. --Аныл Озташ 22:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 Comment Turning it to the right is irrational as the shot is this way, I would have to remove the shadow or it would look out of place. --多多123 17:56, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It is extremely rare for me to reject QIC because of an odd composition, but combined with the unconvincing lighting with harsh, multiple shadows, I do not consider this photo to be a well executed subject shot under studio conditions. --Smial 00:34, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
     Info "Studio" conditions is a bit too much, the only thing I did for this image was put it on a table next to a wall and take the photo. --多多123 10:00, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 Comment Studio conditions does not mean that someone buys or rents a many $$$ expensive professional studio, but that one can use the possibility to control the light, the background and the arrangement of the objects to be photographed at will. Unlike outdoor or action or available light or street photography. Many of my "studio photos" were taken simply with a piece of photo cardboard as a background, a white sheet of paper as a brightener and a halogen construction spotlight or a window (without direct sunlight) as a light source. --Smial 11:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 Comment Oh, okay. --多多123 11:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Чепура_велика_на_ставі.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Protected area in Ukraine By User:Byrdyak --Luda.slominska 09:41, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Ermell 10:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Head is not in focus. --多多123 19:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
     Support The head seems to be in focus for me, so that doesn't seem to be a problem. Other than that it's good quality, so promote. Relativity 05:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
  • weak  Support User 多多123's objection is correct, but I think the image sharpness is still sufficient for a usable A4-size printout. Nice colours, lighting, and composition. --Smial 16:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. --Fabian Roudra Baroi 03:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support agree with others. --GRDN711 17:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Very good quality for a bird captured in flight. -- Ikan Kekek 20:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  SupportAnna.Massini 11:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Anna.MassiniAnna.Massini 11:09, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 7 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

File:রয়াল_এনফিল্ড_মিটিওর_৩৫০_স্টিলার_রেড.jpg

[edit]

  • Lighting doesn't seem to be a problem IMO, the crop is fine for me and the background would be the only problem actually, all IMO. --多多123 19:36, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Tight bottom crop and disturbing background -- Jakubhal 05:22, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others, especially due to the overlapping images from the background. -- Ikan Kekek 20:29, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:29, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Recknitz_Valley,_Ahrenshagen-Daskow_(LRM_20200607_171900-hdr-Pano).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Panoramic view of the Recknitz Valley in Ahrenshagen-Daskow --MB-one 07:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 08:14, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Stitching errors on the outher sides --Grunpfnul 08:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment I've added notes in the two places concerned. --Аныл Озташ 09:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment That's right, I didn't see the issue, removed my support vote. --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:19, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Nötsch_Sankt_Georgen_2_Pfarramt_04072023_4103.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Rectory in Sankt Georgen im Gailtal #2, Nötsch, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 01:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 03:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Verticals a bit off --CherryX 08:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
    ✓ Done @CherryX: Thanks. Verticals have been corrected. —- Johann Jaritz 04:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. Mike Peel 19:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  SupportAnna.Massini 11:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Anna.MassiniAnna.Massini 11:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)