Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2012

File:Dietes bicolor flower.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2012 at 14:24:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Citron -- Citron (talk) 14:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 14:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support great work, Citron. Tomer T (talk) 05:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is the yellow a variant? -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this is a different cultivar. --Citron (talk) 08:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks; and added to Dietes bicolor -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful --Schnobby (talk) 08:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice sharp water drops, I didn´t understand the generous crop at the left side, though Poco a poco (talk) 11:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Flowers

File:Diomedea epomophora portrait - SE Tasmania.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2012 at 23:16:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by JJ Harrison -- JJ Harrison (talk) 23:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JJ Harrison (talk) 23:16, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:47, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It seems too white for me. --Llorenzi (talk) 07:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I agree with Llorenzi though gull's feathers are ... white. Strictly is not even blown but the body of the animal shows almost no detail, probably due to flat lighting. Another symptom is undersaturation: the colors are washed out. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Gull? Bit big for that. JJ Harrison (talk) 11:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Body has low detail. -- JDP90 (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Füssen - Klosterkirche St. Mang24.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2012 at 13:32:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find it a pity that the four columns don't sit square in the frame. Rotating the picture slightly would solve that. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 16:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I have tried to correct this. New version uploaded. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Symmetry is still not absolutely perfect, but I like this picture very much (exceptional sharpness and uniform light, IMO), and especially the trompe-l'oeil of the Devil.--Jebulon (talk) 09:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 09:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 19:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 08:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 19:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Haetosmia male 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2012 at 13:05:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 13:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gidip (talk) 13:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ I like it, even the depth of focus. But it's below the ”minimum” resolution. --Ximonic (talk) 16:08, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually above 2 mpx, if that's what you mean. Gidip (talk) 16:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support O'h... Well I'm changing to weak support as I still think it's just quite smallish. --Ximonic (talk) 19:11, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support special. Tomer T (talk) 05:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm happy with the DOF in this 'special' case; the head is very prominent neglecting other parts. Can be a more generous crop on right if available; serves to increase the resolution too. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Excellent composition. The activity of the head and proboscis are what's important here, and it's illustrated quite nicely. SteveStrummer (talk) 21:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just over the needed DoF, very nice eye Poco a poco (talk) 11:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 06:21, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Tootsi jaamahoone.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2012 at 20:27:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Iifar - uploaded by Iifar - nominated by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It's very nice, but two issues for me: 1. (very) minor stitching errors, 2. Framing. I think author tried hard to keep the rightmost tree into the frame, but I'm not sure this brings anything. Instead, I would have put more railroad into the frame. - Benh (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support More railroad is good; but a cut on the tree will be more disturbing to me. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More railroad was left out because of light conditions (the sky was overexposed). --Ivar (talk) 06:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 09:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:09, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 06:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Flowers in marble, Taj Mahal, Agra, India 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2012 at 06:30:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Hic et nunc and Yann, uploaded by Hic et nunc, nominated by Yann (talk) 06:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yann (talk) 06:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Request Maybe you could improve the symmetry of the framing...--Jebulon (talk) 09:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The exterior frame does not exist on the right, as the structure continues to the perpendicular wall. What do you suggest? Yann (talk) 12:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe crop out the exterior frame (as suggested by note), and correct the perspective (and lens distortion) a little bit ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - OK, but then I will make a new nomination. Yann (talk) 09:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nominationYann (talk) 09:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:23, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lago di Tovel 04.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2012 at 07:26:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by llorenzi - uploaded by llorenzi - nominated by llorenzi -- Llorenzi (talk) 07:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llorenzi (talk) 07:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Request -- Please correct the slanted horizon! Please... It's a fine picture and i'd hate to oppose for such an easily rectifiable flaw such as this. Kleuske (talk) 09:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done As requested, I corrected the horizon. --Llorenzi (talk) 11:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ximonic (talk) 13:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 15:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 20:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too harsh shadow for me. Tomer T (talk) 21:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Shadow is OK to me, the composition I like as well, but the mountains lack sharpness - too small F-number maybe? - A.Savin 22:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the half dark boat. The background is a bit out of focus. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC) P.S. please take a look to my user page ;-)[reply]
Oppose Per alchemist. Don't like how the boat lies in the shadow, de-emphasizing it while it should give an anchor point to the viewer instead. Also few stitching issues (Mentioning it's a stitched image is welcomed). - Benh (talk) 13:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per alchemist. --Julian H. (talk/files) 15:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:51, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Set nomination:Synahlonia on Phlomis, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2012 at 15:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gidip (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment All images are now resized to 65% of their original size. Should have done this from the start. Gidip (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting series. But I don't know whether it is better to select the best one to feature and include the others as 'other versions' under description. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:13, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boloria aquilonaris, Hochmoor Perlmuttfalter 13.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2012 at 21:14:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Boloria aquilonaris, Hochmoor Perlmuttfalter all by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:14, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 21:14, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- This is a marvelous picture Böhringer, congratulations! I will support it one way or the other but maybe it could be improved by: (i) removing the blown parts of the leaves, e.g. by cloning; (2) cropping a bit on the sides. What I like more is the pattern of the scales on the wings, which is very detailed and sharp. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it's the Nth "butterfly mating" FP candidate, and the lighting is a tad harsh. Also we don't really see the mating process (making it suitable for wide audience for sure). But very nice setting and superb composition to me. - Benh (talk) 13:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question Are they actually mating? - Benh (talk) 13:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ja, ich habe noch andere Bilder davon. --Böhringer (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:22, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ -- Highly competitive with the other image available. More resolution and wings more detailed here; but the heads of both butterflies are more visible in the other. The shadows (?) seem bluish to me. I didn't understand that part and the leaf bent; is it bent by you to take the photo? (I know butterflies are very friendly during mating; and I have a shot with them on my finger. ) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:53, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The picture has the disadvantages of being shot at noon, with harsh light on the leaf and harsh shadows on the butterflies' heads. We cannot tell these creatures when to mate... but perhaps a fill flash would have reduced the shadows on the heads. Gidip (talk) 10:44, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Nice shot, IMO too much space left on the right, there is a strange spot just below the right guy (image editing error? I added a note) and the left guy is not really sharp, Poco a poco (talk) 11:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks better now, thanks for the initiative Alchemist Poco a poco (talk) 14:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support and Done: some dust spots removed and the editing error corrected. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

vielen Dank :-)) --Böhringer (talk) 20:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Tomer T (talk) 06:19, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support now after the edit. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Henry G. Marquand House Conservatory Stained Glass Window.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2012 at 18:37:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info designed by Richard Morris Hunt (1827-1895), made by Eugène Stanislas Oudinot (1827-1889), this stained glass window was created for the Henry G. Marquand House Conservatory Window 1883-1884. The window is part of the permanent exhibition of the Museum of the City of New York (Photo, edit, and upload by me) -- PierreSelim (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PierreSelim (talk) 18:37, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 21:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 21:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Added category Trompe l'oeil of which it's a wonderfull example. Had me fooled at first glance. Kleuske (talk) 09:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't sure if it was considered a Trompe l'oeil. Thanks for improving the Categorization of this file. --PierreSelim (talk) 09:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Huh sorry to oppose again, but any reason we have the cropped and altered version instead of the original one with the complete context? - Benh (talk) 13:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
First don't be sorry, reviews are essential in the FP process otherwise we just !vote without comment. The original one, is the display context of the museum, I decided to only keep the central part of the artwork (the stained glass window) and remove the window which was too distracting because we could see the window of the museum behind. Note that this window was made for another build (which do not exist anymore). May be my choice is not good, but really I don't think we miss so much with this choice. --PierreSelim (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the context amplifies how good the effect is (by giving element for comparing), but I also see your point. Moved my vote to Neutral after thinking about it again. - Benh (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support The Trompe l'oeil effect is amazing. Yann (talk) 16:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:27, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I had supported it without any mental restriction if I had not seen the uncropped picture, but I cannot say I disagree with Benh. However, we have to "judge" what the author chose to show, and it is very good and interesting as it is. Congratulations.--Jebulon (talk) 09:18, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: with or without context. --Julian H. (talk/files) 15:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:06, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I didn´t really catch my eye at thumb size but it is great at 100% Poco a poco (talk) 11:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Seebrücke Sellin nordöstlicher Teil.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2012 at 14:56:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (de) 14:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald (de) 14:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 15:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 08:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Damzow (talk) 19:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 19:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:47, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Oryctes nasicornis male 2012 G1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2012 at 05:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded by George Chernilevsky - nominated by George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Darius Baužys ^{→ talk} 19:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Stu Phillips (talk) 19:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 01:41, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 09:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Viljandi vana veetorn.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 14:10:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar -- Ivar (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Halos around the tower. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
the halo is not significant IMO, but the dark trees on the left are disturbing me --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:00, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 06:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ardpur3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2012 at 11:56:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Pierre Dalous - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 11:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 11:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support (though lighting could be increased a bit) --Cephas (talk) 13:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done--Citron (talk) 17:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it. --Llorenzi (talk) 16:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Darius Baužys ^{→ talk} 19:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Good quality and composition. Mild underexposure could be corrected. --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cephas and Julian H. --Llez (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 18:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Stu Phillips (talk) 19:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 01:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jebulon (talk) 14:35, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tamba52 (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:47, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 09:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Sierra Nevada de Merida, Loma Redonda.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2012 at 02:00:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by The Photographer - uploaded by The Photographer - nominated by The Photographer -- The Photographer (talk) 02:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Photographer (talk) 02:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like the composition and lighting. On the other side, there are halos on some plants, the postion of the donkeys doesn't feel right to me (tilt or perspective correction may be needed) and I would increase saturation a bit Poco a poco (talk) 11:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The perspective looks like in reality, please, could you clarify that point a little.(Voy a intentar corregir lo otro, lo tendré en mente para el futuro) thanks --The Photographer (talk) 22:17, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yann (talk) 13:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination You were right Poco a poco, I have reviewed several photos and apparently the error was generated by combining photos with hugin, however, I do not know how to fix this. Yann Thank you very much for your vote. The Photographer (talk) 14:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Strawberry Fields Forever.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2012 at 14:49:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by User:Damzow - uploaded by User:Damzow - nominated by User:Damzow -- Damzow (talk) 14:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Damzow (talk) 14:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice composition Tomer T (talk) 21:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment no one else is going to state his opinion? Tomer T (talk) 19:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great composition, but, sadly, sharpness is lacking. Kleuske (talk) 14:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Kleuske Poco a poco (talk) 11:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boy Face from Venezuela.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2012 at 12:42:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by The Photographer - uploaded by The Photographer - nominated by The Photographer -- The Photographer (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Photographer (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great quality, amazing expression. Yann (talk) 14:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Yann. Tomer T (talk) 14:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love common people. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 01:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kleuske (talk) 11:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cephas (talk) 12:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice shot. --PierreSelim (talk) 13:00, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tamba52 (talk) 20:08, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Citron (talk) 21:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Impressive! -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maire (talk) 10:39, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Brick wall close-up view.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2012 at 08:28:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Peter23 - uploaded by Peter23 - nominated by Alborzagros -- Alborzagros (talk) 08:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alborzagros (talk) 08:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 16:47, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh lighting. Garish colours. Unweathered so no character. Rather thick mortar and not a bond pattern I've ever seen (hence very low EV). The left hand side is out of focus. Colin (talk) 18:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Colin. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:15, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Conejo común (Oryctolagus cuniculus), Tierpark Hellabrunn, Múnich, Alemania, 2012-06-17, DD 03.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2012 at 13:28:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Amirki -- Amirki (talk) 13:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Amirki (talk) 13:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 16:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support INeverCry 00:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:53, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 09:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Isn't it sweet? :) Poco a poco (talk) 22:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 08:01, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose don't want to play the grinch, but "cute animal(s)" is not a sufficient argument for a featured picture. The front legs are not visible good and this image has nothing special for me, it is for sure a QI, but not a FP --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Wladyslaw.--Jebulon (talk) 14:23, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice is not necessarily featurable. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Noise in Blurry areas and per Wladyslaw. --Julian H. (talk/files) 09:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No Wow effect. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Stas1995 (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mokoli'i islet Chinaman's Hat.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2012 at 17:58:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Tonchino - uploaded by Tonchino - nominated by Tonchino -- Tonchino 17:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tonchino 17:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice. Tomer T (talk) 18:30, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 19:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Apart from the leaf on the left, the large ground area isn't good for the composition, in my opinion. --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Corrected about the leaf, thanks for viewing --Tonchino 21:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with Julian's comment, too much ground Poco a poco (talk) 10:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lake Kinney mit Mount Whitehorn.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2012 at 13:08:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Florian Fuchs - uploaded by Florian Fuchs - nominated by Florian Fuchs -- Florian Fuchs (talk) 13:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Florian Fuchs (talk) 13:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Stu Phillips (talk) 19:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Stunning view, I would support if there were a larger version. Currently the image has just a bit above the 2 MP minimum, and a Nikon D7000 does up to 16 MP. - A.Savin 19:57, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Distracting branches at bottom and left. Contrast is a tad high as well. 178.36.3.245 20:49, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP are not allowed to vote (account with more than 10 days and 50 contribs needed, see general rules number 4). As the review might still be interesting I'm letting it here, only striking the oppose. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done new version with higher resolution and no branches uploaded, --Florian Fuchs (talk) 06:40, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Info Can you remove the CA? -- -donald- (talk) 07:51, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is a CA? --Florian Fuchs (talk) 08:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chromatische Aberration. If you have used RAW-Files the RAW-Converter has an option for this. -- -donald- (talk) 09:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done new version without CA uploaded --Florian Fuchs (talk) 11:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very nice. Thanks for the update. -- -donald- (talk) 12:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, thanks Florian for taking into accounts the previous reviews. --PierreSelim (talk) 11:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support now. - A.Savin 13:33, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 14:57, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support now -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 16:32, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:13, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 06:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:35, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maire (talk) 10:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

Support --Ralf Roleček 23:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Graue Wulstling Amanita excelsa.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 11:56:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by H. Krisp -- H. Krisp (talk) 11:56, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:00, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Low color contrast to cluttered background prevents wow, in my opinion. --Julian H. (talk/files) 18:09, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination--H. Krisp (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Albatros1 Wiki.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2012 at 15:46:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info The picture shows the Albatros D.V of Leutnant Paul Bäumer, who was credited with 43 aerial victories in WWI. He flew this aircraft at Jasta 5 in July and August 1917, showing an individual Edelweiss-marking. The image was created using CorelDraw 11 and Photoshop 6 and is based on original WWI photo material. - created by B. Huber - uploaded by B. Huber - nominated by B. Huber -- B. Huber (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B. Huber (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Little issue to be corrected: when one click on this thumbnail above, one can see a different picture...--Jebulon (talk) 16:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Another little issue... Are the markings/decorations historic? If so, could you provide details on the "geschwader" and such? Kleuske (talk) 14:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Of course the markings are historic! It took me quite a while to figure them out, based on WWI-pictures and a lot of discussion with WWI-experts preceds all of my drawings. The aircraft shows the OAW-built Albatros D.V of Paul Bäumer, Jasta 5 who was credited with 43 aerial victories - therefore it has the bright grey coloured primer on the metal parts. Based on original pictures the fuselage was not black - as shown in most older drawings, including earlier versions of my own drawing - but a two-coloured section. The colours i show are the most probable variant. B. Huber (talk) 15:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Great. Could you mention that in the image description? I think it would be of interest to our readers. Kleuske (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The issue mentioned above by me is still here...--Jebulon (talk) 14:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the kind of images i create are not appreciated at Wikipedia. This is my second attempt here and the response has always been very poor. I invest a lot of time and effort in creating these images at the highest standards to provide Wikipedia with historical correct images but if they are completely ignored by the community it might be better for me to stop doing so. B. Huber (talk) 09:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment -- Please be patient, only three days have passed and we are still in the silly season (August). I find your illustrations of very high quality and we certainly need this kind of media in Commons and in ... the FP gallery. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I fully agree with Alvesgaspar. Please notice that there is no oppose vote for the moment. Be patient and don't withdraw. As for me, here in "Commons" (not "Wikipedia"...) your work is great, necessary, useful and highly apreciated. I'm very interested. I'd support this kind of picture with a great enthousiasm and no doubt, if the issue mentionned above were corrected (you did not answer nor correct...). Come on !--Jebulon (talk) 17:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Good and interesting, but this should be in PNG to get featured. Yann (talk) 05:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Again: Could you please explain why the section of the fuselage with the edelweiss and the iron cross is BLACK (and not violet and red) when one click on the picture ?--Jebulon (talk) 14:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a serious problem of uploading new versions of the same file - and that's just what i did a few ays before i nominated this image. In my experience it takes many days until only the current versions is visible - don't ask me why, maybe it is a problem of the different national server and their communication. Unfortunately there is nothing i can do about it. B. Huber (talk) 19:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good now. Very good job. Could you maybe "translate" it in SVG ?--Jebulon (talk) 23:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Info added now as an illustration of the "Paul Bäumer" article in the french WP--Jebulon (talk) 23:18, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:50, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spuller See Panorama von Westen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2012 at 21:11:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Spuller See Panorama all by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 21:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support But what happens to me ? I'm on the way to support boring mountain panorama pictures since some days... Well, this one is really very nice and sharp, I love that light, and wish to see this "in real"... (shame of the wire though)--Jebulon (talk) 23:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as Jebulon. Yann (talk) 05:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 06:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Light is not perfect, but everything else is. -- Julian H. (talk/files) 07:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:49, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing! --Stryn (talk) 10:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--David1010 05:42, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Itemirus (talk) 07:44, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maire (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:07, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--alex.vonbun (talk) 08:42, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 23:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC) wow[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Cape Verde Pico do Fogo caldeira road.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2012 at 10:56:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Cayambe - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 19:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice composition, valuable and aesthetic --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:52, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Tomer for your interest in this image. Thanks also to the supporters. --Cayambe (talk) 07:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pair of Merops apiaster feeding.jpg

File:Puente Don Luis I, Oporto, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 13.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2012 at 11:48:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 11:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support this view of th D.Luis I Bridge, and city of Porto, Portugal -- Jebulon (talk) 11:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support outstanding illustration of an amazing bridge --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes! Kleuske (talk) 14:50, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 16:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the shadow. Tomer T (talk) 19:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 19:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Actually I think that the picture does not capture a little portion of the beauty of that place Poco a poco (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 20:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support top --Böhringer (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(weak) Oppose great view, no question, and the bridge shdow is nice; but I really don't like the crop (cut off bridge on the left, cut off roofs and bridge pier at bottom). --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 13:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Request please avoid the use of the "weak" oppose (or "weak" support) templates, as discussed previously for an another picture, it is confusing for the bot, and makes the final count false. According to the rules, please use only the valid templates, thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 21:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 21:16, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very eye catching view of a very beautiful bridge. I'm also a fan of the shadow. I'd try to fix the brightness level on left side from the RAW (I'll try tonight on the Jpeg), but it's personal taste issue. - Benh (talk) 16:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Info What I meant by "fixing left side" : [1], if author is interested, it would be better to work on the RAW itself. - Benh (talk) 21:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a new version following your advice. I think that it is definitely an improvement and not a matter of tastes, therefore I didn't open a parallel nomination Poco a poco (talk) 16:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:47, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 23:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /kaʁstn Disk/Cat 13:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

Image:2012-07-27 Aussicht Toblinger Knoten.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2012 at 16:40:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Je-str - uploaded by Je-str - nominated by Je-str -- Je-str (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Je-str (talk) 16:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice view, but image has multiple issues (retouching problems on the sky, big stitching error (cropped man on the right), purple CA, overexposed clouds). --Ivar (talk) 18:49, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almost just for getting up there... nice labeling, adding a lot of value... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llorenzi (talk) 12:43, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose hopelessly oversharpned. JPG artifacts (certainly because of the camera and post-processing), low details, disturbing shadows, blown parts, chromatic aberrations. Stitching errors. Posterization. I'm not sure if the users above took a look in the full resolution of the image... --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 12:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per Carschten. Not only overexposured clouds but also hills. —DerHexer (Talk) 13:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Heavy oversharpening, noise (resulting from oversharpening), artifacts, stitching errors and other problems. --Julian H. (talk/files) 08:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Stunning Picture, but sadly absolutly oversharpend. Could you upload a better version? --Martin Kraft (talk) 10:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Je-str (talk) 18:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Teignmouth MMB 07 Deckchairs.jpg

File:Rivière Matamec 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2012 at 12:59:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by Cephas -- Cephas (talk) 12:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cephas (talk) 12:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't want to sound to rude to a contributor as skilled as you... but to me that's a no wow. I think composition and lighting could be better (looks taken at noon), and that flow of water shouldn't be frozen like that (longer exposure time would have yield better sense of movement for me). - Benh (talk) 20:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support for me a very good composition, fantastic light incl. wow factor. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 06:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 18:27, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 19:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do like the composition, the lighting could be better, but the big problem I see here is the lack of sharpness overall Poco a poco (talk) 10:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think the light, the composition, the colors, are very good, but per Poco a poco, the sharpness is so-so, in my opinion. I don't think "frozen water" looks like this in real, and the sense of movement is here enough for me. For my taste, a longer exposure for water gives only an ugly motion blur (with exceptions). Matter of taste, indeed...--Jebulon (talk) 14:44, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The early afternoon light makes the colors slightly dull, and there is CA and unsharpness on the trees, especially on the sides. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Breisacher Munster Hochaltar (Detail).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 09:03:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw. This picture shows the detail of a high altar that was made in the 16. century. The chief motive is Mary's coronation and God the Father. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 09:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 09:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it. Tomer T (talk) 12:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, but random cut = missing a composition, strong and distracting shadows, unfavorable light. More important will be your whole work: File:Breisacher Munster Hochaltar.jpg. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
the cut is not random but focused on the main motive of the altar, I can't see distracting shadows (distracting would mean that important parts would be bad visbible, which important parts are so?) as well but a nice malleable impression --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm sorry, I don't remember asking you for your opinion." Here is simply my opinion at the FP page for all. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:05, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I don't need a permession to clarify that this image is showing the most important part of the altar. On the other hand you are setting up a theory (distracting shadows) which I question because it is not comprehensible for me. If you like you can answer my question so maybe I can improve the parts that are really distracting. But I can't see such parts. Thank you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:17, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion with you is still pointless. You can accept my opinion or not, that is only your problem. My best hint: take a new image with better light. Bye. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you shouldn't vote here if you have a serious problem that your opinion could be asked. As you are not willing to anwser my question we all could think ourselves how intense your "opinion" is. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I'm not your teacher for "how I make a better image", without photographic problems. If you are not open for valid criticism than please don't show us your images. Perhaps it is only one oppose for this image. Good luck. And I remember the de:FP side. For me EOD. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It has nothing to do with being a teacher to ask a point that I didn't see. I do not ask for lessons but for explanation of a global not specific argument made by you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Unlevel (rotate ccw), arbitrary crop. -- Julian H. (talk/files) 16:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
please explain why the main object which is Cultural-historical most important should be an arbitrary crop. the slight rotation is needed is easy fixed. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can't evaluate the Cultura-historical importance, so when the rotation is corrected, I will change my vote to neutral. --Julian H. (talk/files) 15:00, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support A featurable picture is not necessarily a good picture in the sense that it appeals to the sense of aesthetics or that it is executed with all the lights, bells and whistles of photographic technique. This picture is pretty decent from the technical point of view considering the circumstances. Yes, it has shadows, but the shadows are precisely what give this image texture that reveals the intricacy of the work. The lighting may not be the best, but I think that studio lighting would be pretty hard, considering the logistics of the site. So the best that we can hope for is a good image that describes visually the subject matter, and in this case, even with the crop (you always have to crop something), it is pretty informative in many ways, which is the objective of Commons, to gather images that illustrate, register, capture, etc., etc., material for use in other projects. I am sure that many scholars would find this image extremely valuable. It may not be pretty, exciting, but it informs. It has value. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:08, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brilliant crop; I checked all the angels on the edges. The only problem for me is the shadow on top left. (May be a different crop possible including the Son (while seeing the whole work); but it is a different choice. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the crop (Jesus and the figures feet are cut off), and the low angle of view (emphasises the stabilising structure in the top left and the shadows). These shadows are really hard but IMO tolarable considering the available light conditions. Maybe you're better of at Commons:VIC --Martin Kraft (talk) 07:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Bad lighting towards bottom of picture, cropped too far, and slightly skewed. Lwebdan (talk) 11:53, 4 September 2012 (UTC) // voting not valid, cf. rules, very peculiar that users appear here after years of inactivity --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Have to agree the crop reduces the value of this image. If this were a continuous or vast display then I could understand having to crop somewhere rather arbitrary. But chopping Christ out of a Christian alter is rather an unusual approach and it seems to me the three figures are equally important in the scene. Any featured image here would surely be the whole alter. Crops of parts of the scene may be useful for commentary in an article, but not in themselves feature-worthy imo. Colin (talk) 17:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- sorry, but please have a look at the full altar. There is not Christ figure so Christ was not croped out. Maybe you make a conscientious investigation next time. And the argument why a detail picture could not get a FP is not comprehensible for me because we have many examples which refute your theory. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Taxiarchos228 claims the figure on the LHS (cropped out but visible in the full scene linked above) is not Christ. Well this website tells us "The center shrine shows an astonishingly lifelike depiction of the crowning of Mary. God the Father and Christ hold a crown, beautifully decorated with blossoms and angels playing music, high over Mary's head. The Holy Ghost is symbolized by a dove hovering above the crown." Another website says "Coronation of Saint Mary, main altar, 1523-1526. Signed by an unidentified Master "H.L." Saint Mary between God-Father and Christ, the Holy Ghost above her crown. Left the deacons Saint Stephen and Laurence, right the city patrons Protasius and Gervasius." (the left and right here referring to the side panels, also cropped out). This schematic shows the location of Jesus Christ, Mary and God the Father. The German Wikipedia page goes into detail on the figure of Christ saying (via Google Translate) "The representation of Christ is far less restrained. He also appears with a royal crown and scepter. Sweeping hair and a beard frame a gekrauster his face. His gaze, but his whole body is facing Mary. His deep drooping robe boils over his body and held in place by a double cord. At the same time you can see below the bare chest deep spear at his side." But look, the detail crop next to this article text doesn't show Christ. I did my homework before reviewing this article. Both Christ and God the Father jointly crown Mary in this scene. It is absolutely essential that Christ figures in any featurable depiction of this work. I think I and several other reviewers are owed an apology both for the ill-thought-out nomination and the ill-tempered response to review comments.. Colin (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Indeed: I mixed this altar up with an other. The figure is Jesus. The german article and the schematic image was written/ made by me years ago. Jesus is important for the christian religion but the figure of Jesus Christ has not the same importance in cultural reception in art over the thousands of years. This picture shows a piece of art which is a Marienaltar (Mary's altar). This means the main figure of presentation and even of worship is Mary. Jesus and even Godfather has iconographicly just a supporting role. This you can see very clearly because Jesus and God are carved below of Mary, actually God and Jesus are looking up to her and she is not kneeing but well dressed and the absolute center of this event. So why Godfather and Mary and not Jesus and Mary or the three altogether? Three figures would take the dramatic and aesthetic content. God and Mary are facing each other, so my choose was to picture this interaction of this both figures. To put Jesus to an importance that he has definitely not means ignoring the cultural history facts. It's not blemish not to know this important details of the picture but it's a blemish to insist on points that are not reproducing the matter of facts. Therefore this candidature is closed. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - The reduction of central compositioned scenery (with Marie surounded by the trinity) to a bipolar composition (with just Marie an God father) alters the meaning and icongraphy intended by the 16th century artist. Therefore it's this arbitrary cut that ignores 'cultural history facts' for some 'dramatic and aesthetic' reasons (I don't approve). --Martin Kraft (talk) 07:40, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        The reduction of this both figures is owed to the fact that the the artist has chosen this both figures facing each other. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        Mary is not looking down at God the Father. Her head is tilted slightly that way, as though she is listening to him, but she's looking ahead/up, at the crown perhaps. As Martin states, the whole trinity is represented here (with the Holy Spirit above). You're entitled to your opinion that Mary/God are the two most important figures and we are entitled to ours that the scene requires all four figures to function correctly. Claiming our opinion is a "blemish" and that we are ignorant (wrt Christ figuring) when in fact we are correct is just plain rude. Colin (talk) 09:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        I didn't said that Mary is looking down to Godfahther, I said they are facing each other because they do so. Please do not interpret clear facts as you thinks best. And the rest of your theory is definitely wrong. You can read all relevant of this altar in Uwe Fahrer et al. (Bearb.), Münsterpfarrei St. Stephan Breisach (Hrsg.): Das Breisacher Münster. Schnell & Steiner. Regensburg 2005, ISBN 3-7954-1649-3, page 44 til 48. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        
        Well she's not facing him either. For comparison, he is facing her. Quite different. She is facing the front both in terms of her body and her head. Her head is titled at an angle to one one side but is still facing forwards. This really is the most silly discussion I've had all week. Colin (talk) 13:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Colin: Don't waste your time: Wladyslaw will neither accept his obvious misconception nor apologise for his imputations. Somebody who continues to claim all the 'clear facts' for himself, after beeing proved wrong already, won't take any criticism at all. --Martin Kraft (talk) 14:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - Of course it is silly, because you're denying obvious facts, even those that are readable in the cited book. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

<ironie>Of course, literature clearly states, that the only reasonable way to photograph this altar is to cut off two thirds of the trinity, because it is only about this two characters and everything else is just, what the artist did in his spare time.</ironie>Come on: this is nonsense and you know that! --Martin Kraft (talk) 15:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The theory was: is Jesus so important that this figure can not be cropped out. This theory is demonstrably false. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination it's a pity to candidate pictures where a few expert knowledge is required and those "experts" demonstrate their lack of knowledge --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't it a bit ignorant to blame us for incompetence, while you yourself negated at least one of the major characters in this altar - cutting away 2/3 of the holy trinity? --Martin Kraft (talk) 07:40, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I already explained. It's not necessary to start a second discussion. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:30, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is both epic and rather amusing. It also highlights everything that is wrong with this project. 131.137.245.209 13:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uses who are not brave enough to log in and write their opinion using their real name? Is something wrong with the project or just with single users? I believe Commons is more than a loose collection of users. Regarding the candidate, it's of very fine quality but you ask people for their opinion here and these may be influenced by various things, even their current mood. -- Rillke^(q?) 15:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Märkisches Museum Berlin - stained glass window.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 07:54:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 07:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 07:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--David1010 05:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think it needs an horizontal perspective correction Poco a poco (talk) 07:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- In my opinion pespective is OK --Pudelek (talk) 09:08, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The distance between the bars in the left side is shorter, do you suggest that the stained glass is like that? Poco a poco (talk) 14:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Pudelek (talk) 22:37, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bastille, August 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 00:24:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by getfunky_paris (Flickr) - uploaded & nominated by Paris 16 (talk)
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 00:24, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Diesellokomotive MaK G 320 B ex mit Museumszug .jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 19:34:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral schade, hier hätte ich gerne mehr von der Seite gesehen. Sonst sehr gut --Böhringer (talk) 21:30, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lake Agnes im Banff National Park.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 14:11:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Florian Fuchs - uploaded by Florian Fuchs - nominated by Florian Fuchs -- Florian Fuchs (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Florian Fuchs (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Stas1995 (talk) 14:16, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:27, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

* Support -- Lwebdan (talk) 11:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC) User can't vote I think. This user has only 13 edits since October 2008 (50 edits needed to vote in FPC). Another vote of this user is cancelled at a nomination above. -- JDP90 (talk) 13:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- JDP90 (talk) 13:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 22:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 19:40, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Stu Phillips (talk) 16:32, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:19, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Nakhl-Minoo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 12:19:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palm and sunset in Minoo Island (Persian Gulf)

Info created by درفش کاویانی - uploaded by درفش کاویانی - nominated by Alborzagros -- Alborzagros (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alborzagros (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While pretty, a photo of a silhouette against a sunset is not that useful. See above guidelines: "Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others." -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice shot, but nothing special for me --Slick (talk) 11:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Noyabaad Mosque (5).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2012 at 18:48:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by nasir8891 - uploaded by nasir8891 - nominated by nasir8891 -- -- Nasir Khan Saikat ^{(Talk|Contributions)} 18:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -- Nasir Khan Saikat ^{(Talk|Contributions)} 18:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are some quality issues here: purple CA, the sky is a bit too noisy, perspective correction not good enough (right side is not straight). On the other side, I do like the subject Poco a poco (talk) 11:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done --The Photographer (talk) 02:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I love this image. Om Sri Sai Ram! --The Photographer (talk) 02:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ggia (talk) 13:05, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:RAF Eurofighter Typhoon.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2012 at 12:52:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Peter Gronemann - uploaded by Flickr upload bot - nominated by Julian H. (talk/files) 12:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I really like the composition of this shot and considering the difficulty of these long-distance shots, I also find the quality to be good enough to be featured. -- Julian H. (talk/files) 12:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not usually a fan of military equipment, but this is a stunning picture. Kleuske (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The crop is maybe not the best but FP anyhow Poco a poco (talk) 16:38, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find the angle of the plane with the crop somewhat awkward. A square crop maybe? --Cephas (talk) 12:44, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning, I think the composition gives the feeling of the movement of the aircraft. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 19:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Stanford Memorial Church May 2011 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2012 at 21:42:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Really good picture, great detail, only the giant lensflare is a bit annoying. --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:52, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great picture--David1010 05:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:30, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:34, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support but prefer the one in the day lights. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 22:37, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:37, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Tiger-2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2012 at 22:33:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Swimming tiger in Dortmund zoological garden

Info created & uploaded by Hans Stieglitz - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversharpening, strange composition (a lot of space on the bottom, very little on top). --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd probably increase saturation a bit and -if available- reduce the crop in the bottom to show the reflex on the water Poco a poco (talk) 11:21, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --H. Krisp (talk) 09:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Though it would look much better with less cropping at the bottom IMO. Maire (talk) 10:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Request Subspecies info needed. I saw is is listed as 'Malayan Tiger' at [2]. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:41, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done accordingly. Tomer T (talk) 07:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support Thanks. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:37, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Two-wheel tractor and harvesting potatoes.ogv, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 19:31:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by AKA MBG - uploaded by AKA MBG - nominated by AKA MBG -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 19:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 19:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nothing special. Tomer T (talk) 07:23, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Val-d'Orcia-landscape-1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2012 at 02:32:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Val d'Orcia, Tuscany, Italy: Countryside road lined with cypress trees in the summer months.

Info created & uploaded by Hans A. Rosbach - nominated by Raoli -- raul (talk) 02:32, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- raul (talk) 02:32, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral: It's really close to an excellent image, but the composition is a little weird with the top of the tree being cut off and the left area somehow feeling too narrow (not sure why, though). Also has some CA on the bottom and the sharpness isn't perfect. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:59, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Julian H.'s arguments, but I think the cut off of the tree is really too unfortunate. To me, it is sufficient for a "decline" vote, as it seems that another composition was possible to avoid this issue (less ground at bottom = more tree at top). Sorry. Though not far to an excellent image indeed.--Jebulon (talk) 14:29, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Unfortunately I haven't found a picture of the same landscape that has a better cut. The image is a typical summer Tuscan landscape with hills and cypresses. Raoli ✉ (talk) 15:36, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm the author of the picture. I think it is good, and I like it, but I don't think it is excellent. In fact I returned to the same place, I think it was a year later, hoping to improve on this shot, just the way Jebulon indicates. I would probably have made an attempt to include more of the field at the left too. I could however, not even have made this one at that time. I have made an attempt at cropping this just above the second tree, and just below the bottom of the first, but I'm not convinced. Haros (talk) 06:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment You could use other shots of the same picture to make it better. Perhaps, merging multiple photos can bring in something nicer. Raoli ✉ (talk) 09:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The cro is not convincing, and impo the picture is not that sharp. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Siganus corallinus Brest.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 21:19:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Citron - uploaded by Citron - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 21:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 21:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:28, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support (weak). Nice, but the bokeh isn't very good though. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:14, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support A superb, clear and beautiful image. --Korman (talk) 06:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:49, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish

File:Unknown soldier, 1945, war cemetery near Unkel, Germany.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2012 at 11:29:42
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by Kleuske, Image cropped and renominated. -- Kleuske (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Kleuske (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Jebulon (talk) 14:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't see the "wow" factor. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:14, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The "wow" (if you can call it that) is in the place and the date. Kleuske (talk) 22:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nave of Basilica Saint-Sernin - 2012-08-24.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2012 at 14:56:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by PierreSelim - nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 14:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding view (to me !) of the interior (the nave) of the Saint-Sernin Basilica in Toulouse, France, by PierreSelim -- Jebulon (talk) 14:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Excellent indeed. --Julian H. (talk/files) 15:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot (in spite of not being 100% symmetric, as you always advocate :) ) Poco a poco (talk) 15:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Yes, I like symmetry (like in words "poco a poco", for instance), but there is no rule without exceptions, that's salt of life --Jebulon (talk) 16:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Architect more than photograph would be faulty for the symmetry issue ;) - Benh (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a déjà vu feeling, and I don't think it's a coincidence. Looks sharper than mine, but isn't as wide on top. - Benh (talk) 16:54, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Effectively it's not, and mine is far for being perfect. --PierreSelim (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry I did not remember this story, my nomination was entirely free, only because I liked this picture very much.--Jebulon (talk) 19:21, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - If I had to "aim" at someone, it would be more Pierre than Jebulon (sorry Pierre) so don't be sorry Jebulon. But well if people like it... And I should have uploaded mine anyways instead of "complaining". - Benh (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 05:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:50, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Heavy perspective distortions, unfortunate crop. Kleuske (talk) 09:47, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice for me -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:31, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 23:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Moustachioed Womanizer (talk) 13:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Windflower-05237-nevit.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2012 at 12:43:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Effect of different shutter speeds on photograph. In photography, shutter speed is a common term used to discuss exposure time, the effective length of time a camera's shutter is open. Slower shutter speeds are often selected to suggest movement in a still photograph of a moving subject. Fast shutter speeds freeze a moving subject on photograph.

Info created & uploaded by Nevit - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 12:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The fans are right leaning and their centers are not alienated. Slightly out of focus. If this is corrected, I would change my vote --The Photographer (talk) 12:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lack of alignment does not bother me (it's a playful subject, after all). The lack of sharpness does. Kleuske (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think it's unsharp, but please do fix the rotation. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 12:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Drottningholm palace August 2012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 09:02:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question This is a WLM picture. Wouldn't it be fair for all other participants to wait until the contest is over and the jury has decided? - A.Savin 10:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I am the chairman of the Swedish jury and all my pictures are therefore disqualified from winning a prize in WLM in Sweden.--ArildV (talk) 10:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK sorry, didn't notice. - A.Savin 10:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Composition is just off-center. I would prefer either perfectly centered or very off-center. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:15, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A perfectly centered position is not possible. There is a huge fountain in the way.--ArildV (talk) 22:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change to

Neutral. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think, it needs a slight tilt correction Poco a poco (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Question Thank your. Im not sure, CW or CCW?--ArildV (talk) 08:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The correction should be in the CCW direction, to see it, open the picture in full size and scroll it so that the banister is close to one of the edges of your monitor, Poco a poco (talk) 14:23, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Could you add a image note? I cant see it. As far as I can see, all the vertical lines are straight.--ArildV (talk) 14:41, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:30, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info I uploaded a new version, tilt and a small stiching error correted.--ArildV (talk) 12:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tilt got better, nice shot Poco a poco (talk) 21:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the green foreground looks really oversaturated. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 12:08, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose oversaturated --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 09:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:HD 189733b's atmosphere.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 10:05:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info: created by NASA, uploaded and nominated by Stas1995 10:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stas1995 (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support A lot of "wow" factor here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:21, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose non scientific idealization --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:13, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:HailuogouGlacierPanorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 13:19:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Oliver Ren - uploaded by Oliver Ren - nominated by jsjsjs1111 -- Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the crop on the top.. --Llorenzi (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:04, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Panopea generosa.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 15:01:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Snigger. 46.227.232.100 19:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Non valid vote. Please log in to vote, thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 23:29, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good catch  Richard  [®]  18:28, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Snigger Kleuske (talk) 22:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose man's face is too blurry. Tomer T (talk) 15:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If that were me I would wish for it to be even more so! Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:58, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment lol!! Yes, but I needed a human to get the scale!!! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:05, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - The subject is the clam, not the guy. I would hate it if that smirk weren't in the image, though. Kleuske (talk) 22:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - But, if that clam do spray like this? :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        100% real... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        I think consent is implicit if not explicit, but is he aware this will be all over the internet? On the lighter side, I am inclined to bring up Convergent evolution but that may be a stretch.131.137.245.206 14:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes he is... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Made me laugh :) But identifiable person is an issue to me (unless he gave his consent for being published on Commons) - Benh (talk) 17:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

His expression clearly says that he has no problem. The only issue for me is the similarity of the clam and the spray probably made you laugh. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not convincing for featurable. --Yikrazuul (talk) 09:18, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Panorama from pont Saint-Pierre in Toulouse - 2012-08-31.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 06:50:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by me -- PierreSelim (talk) 06:50, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info View of the Garonne in Toulouse just after sunset (around 9pm): From left to right we can see the Quai Lombard, the Quai de la Daurade, the Basilica Notre Dame de la Daurade, the Pont Neuf, the churche Notre Dame de la Dalbade (behind the bridge on the left side), and on the right side we can see the Hôtel Dieu, the Quai de l'Exil républicain espagnol, and a ferry wheels.
Support -- PierreSelim (talk) 06:50, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not really sure about the rotation. Does it only seem wrong? --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This feelings might be comes from the fact the right bank of the city is below the other bank. It used to be the popular district of the city whereas the opposite bank used to be the richer districts (with the basilicas, the city hall, etc.). --PierreSelim (talk) 08:29, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question This is a WLM picture. Wouldn't it be fair for all other participants to wait until the contest is over and the jury has decided? - A.Savin 10:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info It is a WLM picture indeed, but I'm out of the contest: being in the organization team in France, jury in Switzerland, and Léna is also jury in France ... well too much COI for me to contest, my pictures are with {{Wiki Loves Monuments 2012|frNO}} for this reason, the pictures are just counted in the total picture for WLM. I hope this is clear ? --PierreSelim (talk) 10:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's fine. - A.Savin 10:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Paris 16 (talk) 00:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 22:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a huge fan of the large blue areas, creating empty space on most of the canvas. Unbalanced composition, as already pointed out (and even though u could do nothing about it), and very dark overall, wheel put aside. - Benh (talk) 12:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Moustachioed Womanizer (talk) 13:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Perth CBD - Kings Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 05:13:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Khr0n0s -- 27.33.185.222 05:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- 27.33.185.222 05:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Very impressive. Great editing, amazing light, great resolution, definitely excellent. --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice atmosphere --Citron (talk) 09:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--David1010 05:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit of a surreal feeling, especially viewed at large size. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:40, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice Poco a poco (talk) 07:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Paris 16 (talk) 00:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's very nice, but something looks wrong about the tones. It's too bright maybe, and I see haloing on the thumbnail. - Benh (talk) 16:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Benh. Looking at the intersection/cloverleaf in the centre of the image, i very much get the impression that it's la nuit americaine in reverse. The city was much darker than this image suggests. This is actually a very overexposed night-shot trying to be a day shot. Kleuske (talk) 15:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As Benh. --Karelj (talk) 19:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Benh and Kleuske. -- JDP90 (talk) 06:08, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the novelness of it. I would like it if the author didn't push the HDR quite so much (haloing, strange tones, etc), but then I guess it wouldn't be novel. Badon (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Partly a very good and interesting photo, but the overexposed parts around the intersection ruin the picture for me. -- Achird (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Obesidade.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 13:04:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Lmbuga - nominated by -- Tomer T (talk) 13:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 13:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distracting background. Something larger than f/9 should have been used. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:23, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - as per above. Looks like a Value Image to me but not FP. --Murdockcrc (talk) 10:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 16:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunset in leon guanajuato mexico.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 16:06:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty sunset, but I'm not sure what value it would add. It would be better if it weren't all silhouettes. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - as per above user. --Murdockcrc (talk) 10:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Foitzik Unca 6x6 2012-07-08 16-06-35.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2012 at 12:47:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 12:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support very rare Foizik Unca 6x6 from my home town-- Berthold Werner (talk) 12:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 22:59, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In my opinion there's just a tiny bit too much white space at the left. Could you crop the image? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question EXIF showing f/0. Why is that? -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because I used an old macro lens with manual setting. It was made at f/16. --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:27, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. -- JDP90 (talk) 13:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:15, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please remove dust spots. --Ivar (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Could you please set annotations where you see the dustspots. --Berthold Werner (talk) 18:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Added some notes. --Ivar (talk) 18:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:KTZ 2TE10U Aynabulak.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2012 at 20:09:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Kabelleger -- Kabelleger (talk) 20:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info Train 22 Kyzylorda - Semipalatinsk near Aynabulak, Kazakhstan. Unfortunately the railways in large parts of Kazakhstan go through boring, flat terrain; the best we could find was some hilly terrain here and there, such as this river valley.
Info This passenger train has 20 cars, which is way longer than what we see over here in Europe (14 cars max), and is about 550 meters long.
Abstain as author -- Kabelleger (talk) 20:09, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice train picture. A little soft on the left, but OK. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:23, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good shot, but nothing spectacular here, actually that cyan color of the train is not really favourable IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 07:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cyan is color of the flag. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  18:26, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:29, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:44, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Kuremaa mõisa tuuleveski.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2012 at 17:36:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar -- Ivar (talk) 17:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 17:36, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A WLM image - will it actually count in the competition? - A.Savin 18:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I really don't see any problem here. QI and FP have no connection with WLM. Please read WLM rules. --Ivar 18:41, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Donna know about the rules sorry, but in order to provide an unbiased jury decision and fairness to other WLM contributors it would make sense to wait until the national results have been published... For instance, articles taking part in the German writing contest, are not allowed to candidate for featured/good articles before winners stand firm (and yes, I must admit that even German WP sometimes has rules which make sense ;) ) For my part, I will refrain from nominating any of my WLM uploads on FPC and even on QIC for the moment (though the latter is just a quality seal, without having much to do with WOW factor etc.) - A.Savin 19:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful composition. Kleuske (talk) 22:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support lovely picture --Llorenzi (talk) 08:34, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 11:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 15:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice picture. --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful clouds. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 18:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:26, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The windmill is not centered in the photo but it doesn't matter. The picture is bright, crystal clear and beautiful. --Korman (talk) 06:11, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If it were centered, the image would not be as good. But that's just my opinion. Kleuske (talk) 09:27, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're not alone. I would only prefer centered compositions for wide, symmetric buildings. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:29, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:23, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Mauritius.png[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2012 at 07:13:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Peter Kuchar - uploaded by Peter Kuchar - nominated by Kingroyos -- Kingroyos (talk) 07:13, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Full resolution ‎(1,024 × 435 pixels) Kingroyos (talk) 07:13, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Much too small to be a FP. The minimum is 2 Mpx. Yann (talk) 07:41, 10 September 2012 (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:Eger castle - ruins of the romanesque basilica.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2012 at 22:35:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 22:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 22:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Stitching error in the place I have annotated. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:53, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Pudelek (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aerial View - Goetheanum1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2012 at 06:29:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw. This pictures shows the Goetheanum, the world center for the anthroposophical movement in Dornach, Switzerland. This aerial view allows a great view at the unique roof construction. Otherwise it is very difficult to capture. But this picture was also a challenge for the pilot who circled two times around the building and moved at the entry lane of the EuroAirport Basel-Mulhouse-Freiburg. So he had to fly very carefully and considerate. I think the result is worth seeing. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:29, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good reasons to be proud of the result indeed. Nice picture with a good light, sharp enough, good composition. Very stunning building moreover.--Jebulon (talk) 14:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good and very useful. --ArildV (talk) 15:27, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good work. Nice perspective. --Ximonic (talk) 15:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice perspective. Reminds me of these isometric 3D games ;) - Benh (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

don't know how it was cropped, but if you could add more room on the right and below, I think it would be slightly improved. - Benh (talk) 15:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the reason for this crop was that I don't wanted to have an other house at the bottom of the Goetheanum. Basically I have enough material to add more room to the right and below. I will try it for myself; if its better I'll upload a new version. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:02, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ivar (talk) 16:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 18:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ralf Roleček 20:27, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support with big wow! -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 02:54, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good picture + wow Poco a poco (talk) 19:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support great view of this complex. Tomer T (talk) 07:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The building is WOW and the image quality is good --NJR_ZA (talk) 10:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wowsome picture! --PierreSelim (talk) 11:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PierreSelim (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Vernet-Battle of Hanau.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 14:54:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Horace Vernet - uploaded by Alexandru.demian - nominated by DITWIN GRIM --
~~Support~~ -- DITWIN GRIM (talk) 14:54, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems that you don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are necessary. Yann (talk) 04:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Paris 16 (talk) 00:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Slick (talk) 11:31, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- An image to get lost in. Kleuske (talk) 14:39, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Moustachioed Womanizer (talk) 13:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 21:17, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:BennyTrapp Chamaeleo chamaeleon Samos Griechenland.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 18:30:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Benny Trapp - uploaded by Benny Trapp - nominated by me -- Slamhound (talk) 18:30, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Slamhound (talk) 18:30, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems you don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are necessary. Yann (talk) 04:41, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're wrong. The guidelines say "Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits." Tomer T (talk) 07:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 19:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kleuske (talk) 15:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:59, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:26, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:26, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles

File:Calle Carabobo, Maracaibo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 18:00:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by The Photographer - uploaded by The Photographer - nominated by The Photographer -- The Photographer (talk) 18:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Photographer (talk) 18:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice colors! But I'm not as keen on the lamppost. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral As KoH. The lamppost ruins the composition. Yann (talk) 04:19, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found it interesting that both poles are bent in opposite directions due to colicion with cars. It would be worthwhile to do a shortened version and again nominate? --The Photographer (talk) 04:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Featurable picture IMO (with this new camera !), I like the colors and it looks "new" to me. About the lamppost(s): IMO, it ADDS to the composition !--Jebulon (talk) 13:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support strangely i like the lamppost, too. Kleuske (talk) 16:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool lantern! :-) --Fabian³¹⁸ (talk) 13:30, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crab I.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2012 at 19:09:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by rjcastillo - uploaded by rjcastillo - nominated by rjcastillo -- Rjcastillo (talk) 19:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rjcastillo (talk) 19:09, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks detail and sharpness. The centered composition doesn't really do it for me. decltype (talk) 10:24, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Image not categorized (species not identified either), Blurry and noisy at full resolution (ISO 1,600). -- JDP90 (talk) 12:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dark, unappealing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Its a poor image of a crab due to the difficult angle. Nothing that the photographer could do here. --Korman (talk) 06:09, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ -- All of the above opposing reasons. -- Fotoriety (talk) 05:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Editors who have 50 edits can vote. --Ivar (talk) 05:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Im Februar 1598 an der holländischen Küste gestrandeter Walfisch.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 21:52:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ I like the image (no wonder, i'm dutch) but there's a nasty, visible fold right down the center that puts me off. Kleuske (talk) 22:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that the picture was published in a book that contained pictures of the events in the 1598. The picture was folded in half, because the picture was larger than the book. I have no way to remove these kink in the image. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 19:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support after reading the explanation above. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support idem. Kleuske (talk) 10:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like this picture. I've tried to get rid of the fold and partly succeeded. My version is better but not perfect. Someone, more clever than I am, can do it, for sure. --JLPC (talk) 07:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:52, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Merddin Emrys at Minffordd.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2012 at 15:00:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Peter Trimming - uploaded by Bruce1ee - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1ee^talk 15:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- —Bruce1ee^talk 15:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Slick (talk) 11:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only 1 1/2 coaches are visible, there is -instead of a viewable coach- an information board in the foreground. At least, something of the platform is cropped and the main focus is on the right half of the picture. --Fabian³¹⁸ (talk) 13:30, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:2010 Utah State Capitol Salt Lake City.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 07:16:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Pocksuppet1999 - uploaded by Pocksuppet1999 - nominated by Pocksuppet1999 -- Pocksuppet1999 (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- Pocksuppet1999 (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are necessary Yann (talk) 07:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not very sharp, loads of uninteresting detail (like cars) and not enough subject. Kleuske (talk) 09:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Just not enough subject. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:23, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Loads of detail? Not very sharp? Which is it? Follow the lines in the "uninteresting" and "not enough subject" parts. What do they lead to? Clouds, mountains, cars, leaves - they all lead to the subject. These are principles taught in the first day of art classes... Pocksuppet1999 (talk) 10:05, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The word "details" has two senses: 1) objects; 2) clarity. Kleuske is saying that there are objects that affect the composition negatively, such as cars. It is not being used in the sense that the image is too clear. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Obvious stitching error on left part of the building (Stitching doesn't seem to be taught in art classes ;-) ). Strange placement of the main subject also, and very poor quality. - Benh (talk) 13:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Due to the distortion, the perspective is a bit strange, but that makes it interesting imo. I also like the composition, how clouds, tree, cars etc. are quite nice arranged around the center. Unfortunately, it is too blurry, so there is at least a technical issue preventing a positive vote from me. So don't be discouraged, in general, that's a nice pic.--Taraxacum (talk) 15:32, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:24, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elymnias hypermnestra female 2 by kadavoor.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2012 at 09:37:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Elymnias hypermnestra race caudata, female. The Common Palmfly, Elymnias hypermnestra, is a species of satyrid butterfly found in south Asia. This butterfly species is dimorphic, males and females do not look alike. Males exhibit black colored upperside forewings with small blue patches and reddish brown color on upperside hindwings, while the females mimic butterfly species of the genus Danaus. All by me. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:37, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support My first attempt to take a photo after I started posting here (FPC). Eager to know if any improvement. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:37, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. There's a leaf that's a bit distracting in the bottom left; could you blur that out? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:53, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know how to blur some part of an image. And the leaf is a bit big to clone out; I afraid. Anyway I will make an attempt tomorrow. And what about this tight frame; my old style? -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:59, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded my edit here: File:Elymnias hypermnestra female 2 by kadavoor edit.jpg. Unfortunately, it seems that we are using different color spaces, hence the wrong colors in my edit. What color space are you using? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:42, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I checked in my home computer and didn't find any color difference; so the edit is fine to me. I just used Picasa to correct the brightness only, didn't touch the colors. I don't know terms like 'color space'. Thank you for the edit and you may add it as an alt. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:44, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there's nothing "wrong" about the colors per se; they just look different on my computer and I wanted to see if that bothers you. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

* Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit[edit]

Info Edited to blur out bottom left leaf. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:12, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I prefer this one Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Me too; thanks King of Hearts. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Changed my vote -- JDP90 (talk) 08:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

The chosen alternative is: File:Elymnias hypermnestra female 2 by kadavoor edit.jpg

File:12-06-05-aut-rom-freundschaftsspiel-103.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2012 at 19:57:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ralf Roleček - uploaded by Ralf Roleček - nominated by -- Ralf Roleček 19:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ralf Roleček 19:57, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I don't see a good reason for this strange expression on his face. --Julian H. (talk/files) 07:10, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Julian. Tomer T (talk) 07:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:12-06-05-innsbruck-by-ralfr-164.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2012 at 19:52:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ralf Roleček - uploaded by Ralf Roleček - nominated by Ralf Roleček 19:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ralf Roleček 19:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:43, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Slick (talk) 11:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 22:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Looks tilted to me. Is that how it's supposed to be? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is a Lens with 10mm and i was at the top of a parking house, looking bittle down, because this the picture must tilt a little bit. --Ralf Roleček 18:06, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What I mean is rotation, rather than vertical distortion. It looks too CW to me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
sorry for my bad english. look at vertical lines (windows), they are vertical. --Ralf Roleček 21:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I guess so. Support King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:09, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow. Tomer T (talk) 06:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Monastery, Petra, Jordan8.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 20:26:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info El Deir ("The Monastery") in the ancient city of Petra, Jordan. Created, uploaded and nominated by Poco a poco -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The image is sharp and clear. The picture is centered on the monastery building and the building is not lost in any sun shades at all. It is fully exposed to the sun. This is a good candidate for a featured picture. --Korman (talk) 23:34, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Murdockcrc (talk) 10:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I hate reviewing without writing anything, so I'd say subject may be a biiiiit too close to bottom border. But still very nice for me - Benh (talk) 21:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 12:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting --The Photographer (talk) 17:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ionutzmovie (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support – On the face of it, this picture has the necessary detail and illustrative clarity to be FP, but what makes it special is the clever composition. Just the right angle gives the building a hunched appearance which, combined with the close crop, conveys the solitude of the subject. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Megalithic grave Harhoog in Keitum, Sylt, Germany.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 23:40:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:40, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:40, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful! -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:26, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achird (talk) 09:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Any reason why it was shot at f/22? --Murdockcrc (talk) 10:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kleuske (talk) 10:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ You should at least reduce noise in the sky. - Benh (talk) 10:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Böhringer (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you! --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:23, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you too ;-) Support - Benh (talk) 21:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please remove dust spot from the sky. --Ivar (talk) 13:23, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Böhringer (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you! --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:23, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Danesman1 (talk) 15:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support reduce noise in the sky and remove dust spot from the sky (ich hoffe das passt so --Böhringer (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 21:06, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I can see this becoming a top contender for POTY :) King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JLPC (talk) 21:12, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ionutzmovie (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 07:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Haeckel Chaetopoda-edit.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 17:48:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ernst Haeckel - uploaded Calibas - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting! -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and of great historic value. --Cayambe (talk) 07:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cayambe Kleuske (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 12:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 14:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ionutzmovie (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Citron (talk) 17:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 22:22, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Antoni Gutierrez Diaz.png[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 09:00:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Barbara D. - uploaded by Barbara D. - nominated by Dvdgmz -- Dvdgmz (talk) 09:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dvdgmz (talk) 09:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Too small: 2 Mpx is the minimum. Yann (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2012 (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.

Support--Kippelboy (talk) 04:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vihula mõisa tuuleveski.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 15:33:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by --Ivar (talk) 15:33, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 15:33, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Not bad, but I get the feeling that this is "just another windmill picture." -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:32, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with King Poco a poco (talk) 06:19, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like the "cleanliness" of this picture. Tomer T (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Not much interesting as your previous FP and this although each windmill are different and may have their own EV (I've not much knowledge about the subject). -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 12:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:London Zoo 01118.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2012 at 17:26:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Nevit - uploaded by Nevit - nominated by Danesman1 -- Danesman1 (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Danesman1 (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice exemplar, and good quality, but the crop is far too tight Poco a poco (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Disturbing background and tight; but far more detailed than the current FP and in a more natural environment. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:47, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:34, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Disturbing background and crop is too tight. -- Darius Baužys ^{→ talk} 16:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice, but background is a little distracting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support As per Jkadavoor comments. --Cassianto (talk) 15:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Nice quality photo, very clear and detailed.--Pollycat (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You dont have enough edits to vote. -- JDP90 (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vase on the terrace of Grand Peterhof Palace.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2012 at 14:35:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Florstein, nominated by A.Savin 14:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 14:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome colors --Martin Kraft (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 15:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:16, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 23:27, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition --The Photographer (talk) 02:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC) I changed my mind per Tomas and Benh. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This picture really is not about the vase, but of everything. The depth of field is too great creating an everything in focus effect, visually distracting. The proportion of vase/surroundings does not appeal to me, and centered composition of main subject, the lighting is flat. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Trivial centered composition, oversaturated and globally overprocessed (I suspect the clarity trigger in Lightroom was pushed a bit too far). Par Tomas for depth of field issue. Obviously author wanted focus on vase, but choice of wide angle yields busy background. - Benh (talk) 12:35, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the lesson. :) --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I prefer calling it opinion :) I hope it didn't sound like I was looking down on you. - Benh (talk) 22:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - No-no, it's okay. I'm upset a bit by those who dont have his own opinion. --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 14:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. --Citron (talk) 19:58, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. --Böhringer (talk) 11:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. --Banangraut (talk) 15:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Do you have your own brain, or all of you use the Benh's one? Just interested. ;) --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is pure humbleness to appreciate a good review than to try to say something new/unimportant and pretend that we too are good reviewers. :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 02:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks for explanation. I'm simply a neophyte in this section of WM and dont understand something yet. But anyway - it's not very good that you've changed your opinion post factum... I think. --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not so good; but sometimes we have to reconsider our opinions, considering the wise. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 12:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like everything in focus. It would just be a meaningless object without the context. Although I think the composition could have been decentered a little for a nice 2/3 ratio, but it still looks good. In fact the only reason I forgive the composition is BECAUSE everything is in focus. Badon (talk) 07:48, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support It would be boring as a standalone object. The context adds a lot of value. Yann (talk) 05:13, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A bit oversaturated, also in my humble opinion the DoF is either too short or too long. --PierreSelim (talk) 18:15, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not clear what the main object is. Oversaturated. -- -donald- (talk) 07:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I also like pictures where it is not clear what the main object is. So for this one, it is all about taste: composition, color intensity, whatever... i like it! --Taraxacum (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Navy Day Sevastopol 2012 G05.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 06:12:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded by George Chernilevsky - nominated by George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:12, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:12, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I get that the idea behind the composition is to fit the ship inside the flags ... but there's just too much going on in that picture for me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:25, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Encosta dos Guindais, Oporto, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 06.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 19:33:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Encosta dos Guindais with the city wall and the funicular view from the Dom Luís over the Douro. Created, uploaded and nominated by Poco a poco -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the shadow that the bridge(?) casts, and something about the composition does not sit well with me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose That's the bridge (Puente Don Luis I) we voted to be featured a little while ago. Kleuske (talk) 09:12, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're right. You can see a part of the shadow of the bridge that became FP a few days ago. I thought that it'd be no problem, because the subject and lighting are different. Actually, this picture is from the bridge, Poco a poco (talk) 11:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the problem, the problem is that this picture isn't as good as the other one. The shadow's a problem and the not very appealing composition is another, lack of a clear subject is the most important. There are beautiful pictures in the view, though. Stick on a telelens and try to focus on _one_ of the many details in there. There's a moorish wall, which doesn't get the attention it deserves, there's houses and stairs glued to the slope which make wonderfull compositions, a nice front of houses, etc. Kleuske (talk) 15:05, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Murdockcrc (talk) 10:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why are the pixels on the right part of this image so curious? --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:09, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add a note? I don't know what you mean Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Tomer T (talk) 07:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A "no wow" would do it for me. But I'd add that it looks too NRed and oversharpened (or not properly sharpened like bad mask setting, I'm not really sure), resulting in that oil painting look. - Benh (talk) 12:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Ok, thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it Poco a poco (talk) 19:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lünersee Sauakopf Rätikon 46.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 20:18:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Panorama auf dem Saulakopf im Rätikon. Blick auf den Lünersee. all by -- Böhringer (talk) 20:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 20:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I added the Template "personality rights". --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:46, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ -- The 2 people looking at the camera are too distracting and prominent - luring the eye away from the panorama that should be the focus. -- Fotoriety (talk) 04:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Editors who have 50 edits can vote. --Ivar (talk) 05:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Per Fotoriety. --Julian H. (talk/files) 08:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Despite the guy having same shoes as mine ;-) Horizon is in the middle. I've learnt not to like it. And the people really kill it imo. - Benh (talk) 08:59, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - as per above, the people make for a distracting foreground. --Murdockcrc (talk) 14:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Ok, thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it --Böhringer (talk) 10:39, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Küngs Maisäß Panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 10:43:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Küngs Maisäß all by -- Böhringer (talk) 10:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 10:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lighting isn't ideal: too many dark places, and also tight framing. Tomer T (talk) 12:19, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The areas with purple paint look strange. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Ok, thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it --Böhringer (talk) 10:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Podalirio (Iphiclides podalirius), Añón, España, 2012-08-27, DD 07.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 20:10:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Exemplar of Scarce Swallowtail (Iphiclides podalirius) in Añón, Aragon, Spain. All by Poco a poco -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great details of the hind-wing including the long tail (I didn't see that much long tail in other photos of them. Is it a specific form?); but DOF issues in other parts (I know it is difficult in this AOV.) and feel noisy. We din't have a good photo of this species so far. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean with AOV? --Poco a poco (talk) 08:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Angle of view. Here we prefer to keep the butterfly flat to the sensor to get maximum sharpness (considering the EV). I like this AOV, looking straight at me; but back is far from the camera and out of focus. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:07, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You mean an angle like this? --Poco a poco (talk) 09:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is interesting; but a clear underside or upper-side view is more preferred. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 10:17, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much out of focus: flower in front, wing in back. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Ok, ok, was not a good idea. By the way, Jkadavoor, I cannot tell you if this exemplar is an specific subspecies, but agree with you that that tail is longer as what I can see in other pictures Poco a poco (talk) 06:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alatskivi mõisa peahoone.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2012 at 19:22:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar (talk) 19:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Ivar (talk) 19:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:30, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the sky is a bit too dark for my taste (pol filter used maybe?), but looks like a FP to me. --Murdockcrc (talk) 10:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment tending to oppose: the sky looks really unnatural...--Jebulon (talk) 15:46, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It's ok, if you do that. The sky looks dark due to use of polarizing filter. I was trying to reduce sun's reflection from the bright building and didn't notice the problem with the sky (I'm still entirely an amateur). --Ivar (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think you have only increased contrast between building and sky. Polarizers don't work like magic and only reduce reflections on specific conditions. It's recoverable, if you use good software, it's easy to brighten only blue color (and not channel). I could do it, but better from RAW imo :) - Benh (talk) 19:16, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info New version uploaded, what do you think? --Ivar (talk) 19:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To me it looks definitely better ! - Benh (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llorenzi (talk) 17:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 12:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 13:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support – An underrepresented subject in excellent clarity, and the composition matches it subject nicely: a very fine catch for Commons. SteveStrummer (talk) 04:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per SteveStrummer. Tomer T (talk) 07:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 08:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Distelfalter , Vanessa cardui.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2012 at 19:41:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Vanessa cardui, all by -- Böhringer (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 20:18, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Slick (talk) 20:23, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:06, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Far better than existing FPs (1,2). The tail end of the hind wing is not sharp; the problem of the 100mms :( -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:34, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ionutzmovie (talk) 16:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ very impressed, excellent picture.--Pollycat (talk) 17:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You dont have enough edits to vote. -- JDP90 (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:32, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 18:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achird (talk) 20:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Fußballländerspiel Österreich-Ukraine (01.06.2012) 43.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2012 at 06:33:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 06:33, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distracting foreground - Banangraut (talk) 15:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Banangraut, that arm is really a pity! -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment you're right, I'll try to fix it --Wladyslaw (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

done now. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Better. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 17:33, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good picture, no wow Poco a poco (talk) 19:52, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

did you ever made pictures of such event? To show the referee in a typical pose during the game is rather difficult such as any other good and meaningful image of such a fast game like soccer. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:48, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't made pictures of a football match for years. I did some pictures longer ago but not with a press pass. For somebody who has seen thousends of games, both live and on TV, this picture does not look spectacular, but rather usual, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 11:59, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rho Ophiuchi.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2012 at 09:20:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by NASA/JPL-Caltech/WISE Team - uploaded & nominated by Originalwana (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support As nominator Originalwana (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 04:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stas1995 (talk) 14:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy

File:Violetter Lacktrichterling Laccaria amethystea.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2012 at 09:44:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Holleday - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 09:44, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 09:44, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- I love the 3D feel captured by these mushroom pictures. If I have a complaint it is that the mushroom stem looks flat from direct light. Colin (talk) 20:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice pic, but DOF is just a tad too much for me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stu Phillips (talk) 16:35, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:48, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 21:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:28, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:29, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:11, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi

File:Bison bonasus Avesta.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2012 at 21:46:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by me -- V-wolf (talk) 21:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- V-wolf (talk) 21:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Some shadow areas (e.g. face, underside, tail) are pitch-black. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:26, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:46, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dresden-Jordanstraße-gp.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 10:07:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Graffiti in der Dresdner Neustadt Jordanstraße Ecke Forstereistraße.

Info created and uploaded by Kolossos, nominated by Yann (talk) 10:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yann (talk) 10:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition looks unbalanced. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:32, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gruppo del Brenta 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 12:01:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by llorenzi - uploaded by llorenzi - nominated by llorenzi -- Llorenzi (talk) 12:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- As nominator --Llorenzi (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice, but the dark shadow at the left is distracting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I upload a new cropped version. --Llorenzi (talk) 17:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Unfortunately, now the black trees on the right (which I didn't feel were that much the first time) become the distractor. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - If you don't like it, I can just revert the new upload... --Llorenzi (talk) 07:39, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Yeah, the crop reduces the sense of scale without really reducing the apparent amount of darkness... -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haghartsin Refectory-10.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2012 at 22:20:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Pandukht - uploaded by Pandukht - nominated by--Pandukht (talk) 18:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see the "wow" factor in this image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:ShiFengWaterFall 002.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2012 at 23:31:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Weihao.chiu - uploaded by Shizhao - nominated by jsjsjs1111 -- Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 23:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 23:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I really like this one, but it seems to need a little clockwise rotation and the overexposed areas in the waterfall are annoying. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The only (very minor) peeve i have with this picture, is that i don't like long exposure times that much. It's a beautiful image, though and judging from the top of the waterfall (which should be level) it does not need any rotating. Kleuske (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the too long exposure, I prefer "frozen" (as says Benh) effect for water, but it is matter of taste. Anyway, the strong CA of the trees on the overexposed sky is a no-go to me.--Jebulon (talk) 13:18, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as in Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Shifen_waterfall -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support An uncommonly engaging photo – I love the complexity of the composition. SteveStrummer (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Taraxacum (talk) 16:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Would change my vote if the overexposure with visible CA is fixed Poco a poco (talk) 20:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose due to CA and overexposure of some parts. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overexposure of some parts --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:X60 Riddarholmen September 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2012 at 15:30:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 15:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 15:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition is a little too busy IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the composition, the wires and all that stuff is not disturbing me, very good technical execution --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a cut-off train is IMO not a good motive; when making photos of trains it’s generally a good idea to either show the complete train or have its rear visible part covered by some object (a tree for example), but only showing the front part and then having the image cut off is not something a featured picture of a train should normally do. No wow factor either. darkweasel94 Diskussion/talk/diskuto 18:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have no objections to the composition. Albertus teolog (talk) 21:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are a lot of objects in the background that distracts one's attention from the train. --Korman (talk) 06:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me the breaking of the "rules" is what gives this photo its wow. The composition is good. By contrast the somewhat messy background is making the front of the train quite serene and yet powerful. It's a bit like a divine being plunging through the chaos. In this case it's the chaos of the bottle-neck at Riddarholmen in Stockholm. -- Achird (talk) 09:44, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The slightly out focused background is not disturbing me in larger view. The composition (coming in-to-the-frame) and the 3D feel (thanks again for the choice of big aperture) give me a big wow. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:50, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Jkadavoor. Kleuske (talk) 10:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Île du Père-Conan.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2012 at 22:35:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by Cephas -- Cephas (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cephas (talk) 22:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I don't want to oppose you again ;-) and it caught my eyes. But:

Hi Benh. It's find to oppose – FP's are not an ultimate goal to me.

I would try another crop and get rid of that foreground, It's too small to add a context IMO, and a symmetric composition might serve the picture better,

Foreground stuff and non-symmetric composition is often considered a standard for scenic pictures.

I'm a bit sad about that factory on the left side which ruins the "wild" feeling of the place,

I know, but I find that deleting a building is not like deleting a trivial branch.

Looks like NR smeared details away,
I would look at the apparent tilt (to the left) issue,
that's all folks!

Sorry for being a bit picky ;) - Benh (talk) 22:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot the many white stains on the water... what are they? - Benh (talk) 22:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I used a polarizing filter which tend to darken the sky (and water) unequally.

I will see what others might say and will work out an alternate version accordingly. --Cephas (talk) 14:50, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I would love to support as this is a beautiful picture, but I agree with the suggestions by Benh. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info Here it is with some urbanization work, crop and tilt correction done. This is about the most I can do. --Cephas (talk) 23:47, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support (weak). The image is a bit soft and there's some minor CA on the white cross on the left, but otherwise good. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:32, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I didn't ask the factory to be cloned out, just said that I was sad about it being there... I'm also against manipulations which just alter reality. White stains are also still there, and I was wondering what they are (I did not talk about the white to blue gradient) - Benh (talk) 12:35, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gogbot, Enschede, CatCopter in flight.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2012 at 09:57:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by Kleuske (talk) 09:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- As nominator Kleuske (talk) 09:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral not sure for FP, but it's the first cat quadcopter I've ever seen! --PierreSelim (talk) 18:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a real dead cat. I dont like to support this. I missing the wow effect too. --Slick (talk) 20:19, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It is, and it died naturally. As to the wow. this work of art got worldwide media attention, so the lack of wow votes seem a little subjective. You don't like supporting dead dinosaurs on display, either, or is this just reserved for dead cats? Kleuske (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disappointed they didn't use the orange props for the rear end too. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That has it reason to know where the front of the quadrocoter is. -- -donald- (talk) 07:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, that's something to take up with the builder of the CatCopter. I can't take pictures of what isn't there. Kleuske (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lack, as noted, gives the impression there isn't any and contributes to the issue of it blending into the background. Saffron Blaze (talk) 11:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Unesthetic. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:31, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You mean Unethical, i think. Kleuske (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Or anesthetic, as I feel. Oppose -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 08:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a good photo for documentation, but I feel like the cat and the props blend a bit with the background, and don't stand out. Tomer T (talk) 10:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. That's the first honest review sofar. Kleuske (talk) 10:31, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Relatively small with low contrast to the background.--Julian H. (talk/files) 11:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "Unethical" or "I don't like to support this" are no arguments for determining FP-worthiness, imo. Pictures of war, environmental pollution and similar things are hardly ever something you want to support, yet they definitely belong here. --Julian H. (talk/files) 11:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- "Unethical" is very much a criteria to be FP or not. Yann (talk) 13:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since when? Consult Ye Guidelines and tell me where the requirement is. Besides, what's unethical about either the image or the catcopter? Is an image of a pair of leather shoes unethical, too? If so, why, if not, why not? At least this cat died on its own, not helped by a butcher. Kleuske (talk) 13:43, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Wow? Yes, it shows a lot about stupid ideas. Educational value? To me, it is bordering to be out of scope, except to show said "stupid ideas". But even for that we have better images. But I think it is already a dead horse as FP. Yann (talk) 05:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well, that's the best catcopter picture I've ever seen. Not aesthetic, but definitely wow! And as it tells a lot about humans, it also has some educational value. --Taraxacum (talk) 15:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you give one or two examples of educational value and what it tell us about humans?--G Furtado (talk) 17:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - 1a. It's an image of a quadcopter, 1b it's work of art, showing how the concept of Art has changed since the 19th century. 2) people react very differently to skins of (say) cows or pigs, than to skins of cats, basing the difference mainly on the "Aaibaarheidsfactor", the animals (perceived) cuddlyness. Things that are no problem when you do them with pigskins are a problem when you do them with catskins, even though the pigs were deliberately killed and the cat was not. Kleuske (talk) 18:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've no problem to reuse the skin of pigs, cats or of even humans; but this wildest way to transform a cat to a Flying squirrel hurts. BTW, I added some description and category to improve the document. Saw the other picture too. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:30, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 08:23, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! Would have supported if it were nominated on April 1. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The rotors of the CatCopter blend with the background in a confusing way. The background spoils the composition. -- Achird (talk) 08:38, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A photo of an unusual thing does not necessarily mean a photo of unusual quality. This image requires so much background information that its illustrative value is almost totally lost. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Kleuske (talk)) 13:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thermal Bath in Eger.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 12:55:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 12:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 12:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special, no "wow". --Yikrazuul (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks flat; Lack of sharpness. --High Contrast (talk) 20:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias)-009.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 12:25:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Hans Stieglitz - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 12:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Danesman1 (talk) 15:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Clipped whites. --Julian H. (talk/files) 17:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice reflection, but the head is not in focus. --–Makele-90 (talk) 19:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sadly the head of the bird is not in focus, it's a pity because this picture is indeed very nice --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is wildlife photography, the head might not be pin-sharp but it's acceptable. The composition is beautiful and the exposure well done. --Murdockcrc (talk) 14:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: As Wladyslaw --Taraxacum (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice composition but, sadly, per Wladyslaw. I don't think a great heron is that difficult a subject to catch. They are everywhere. - Benh (talk) 15:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. The excellent composition is not "mitigating" enough.--Jebulon (talk) 17:09, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peilturm Kap Arkona 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 11:45:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. -- Felix König ✉ 11:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Felix König ✉ 11:45, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:16, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:05, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there's a halo on the left (see annotation) and the tower is a bit wider at top than at bottom. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 20:29, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed the halo as well when voting but decided it wasn't too bad. But I agree with your second point; it should be corrected. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 12:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - composition is too tight. Could be a Valued Image. --Murdockcrc (talk) 14:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Murdockcrc. --Ivar (talk) 14:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – This looks like a crop made for a magazine or newspaper. The tower looks so small in its tiny frame. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chewing Gum on Berlin Wall (1).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 06:04:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Nasir8891 - uploaded by Nasir8891 - nominated by Nasir8891 -- -- Nasir Khan Saikat ^{(Talk|Contributions)} 06:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -- Nasir Khan Saikat ^{(Talk|Contributions)} 06:04, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- --Nhasive (talk) 13:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't have enough edits to vote. 50 edits are needed. -- JDP90 (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too unsharp. Tomer T (talk) 13:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sharpness is passable, but I do not see the "wow" factor in this. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - IMHO, composition does not have enough EV to be FP. Very noisy background. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Info - reduced the background noise. should be ok now. -- -- Nasir Khan Saikat ^{(Talk|Contributions)} 17:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Соборы местное кладбище готов.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 23:50:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Elena rapsodia - uploaded by Elena rapsodia - nominated by Elena rapsodia -- Elena rapsodia (talk) 23:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Elena rapsodia (talk) 23:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not very sharp, overblown roof on the right, and disturbing dark foreground. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice place... but per King of Hearts. --Cayambe (talk) 06:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't even know what I am looking at, what is the subject? can you add a more revealing category? Poco a poco (talk) 12:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:360° Panorama Lünersee Sauakopf Rätikon.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 22:11:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info 360° Panorama auf dem Sauakopf mit Blick in den Rätikon (Diesmal ohne Wanderer) -- Böhringer (talk) 22:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 22:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral OK, but the lighting isn't optimal and some parts are hazy. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there are lots of dust spots in the sky, please have a look at it. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 15:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --Böhringer (talk) 19:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aethaloessa calidalis by Kadavoor.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 09:48:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Aethaloessa calidalis. The adult moths of this species are black, with large overlapping orange spots on each wing. The thorax is black and orange. The abdomen is orange with a black tail. The species occurs across south-east Asia and Australia. All by me. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I expect an instant oppose due to the shaky antennas; but the way how I captured her still makes me smile. It is a very small moth hovers over the grass (never above 1 foot) to collect nectar from the flowers of various grass and herbs in the evening; otherwise rests under the grass blades. I usually find them under my feet and chase them on my knees. It is very fast from flower to flower; and is painful sometimes when I’m over the touch-me-not plants. And this is the best I got after several days and hours. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Expecting the animal to hold still seems a little unrealistic. Instead the movement lends the image a some action, which i like. The rest is nice and sharp, although the "Yet Another Butterfly"-feeling remains. Kleuske (talk) 10:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Lovely photo.--Pollycat (talk) 16:59, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- You dont have enough edits to vote. -- JDP90 (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support pretty moth. Tomer T (talk) 17:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:06, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:34, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Alter Elbtunnel Hamburg menschenleer.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 14:41:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald (de) 14:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald (de) 14:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nice! Das "menschenleere" ist wohl grösste Wow. Kleuske (talk) 14:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sometimes the simplest is the best. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support 2258hrs ftw. Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 17:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great picture of an unusual location. Andy Mabbett (talk) 18:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support And what's even more remarkable to me is that this isn't even a monochrome sepia or whatever. Seems to be the actual colors. - Benh (talk) 21:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! Yann (talk) 05:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 05:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:55, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 13:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 07:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kikos (talk) 19:00, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Croix de Lorraine Sentier des 25 Bosses.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 21:36:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by myself! -- Benh (talk) 21:36, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info The hiking path of the 25 hills (sentier des 25 bosses) may be the most famous around Paris. Some (like me) consider it to be difficult (15km, and we walk up and down 800m) and many parisians come here when they seek a training before a more serious trip (or simply to take a breath of fresh air not too far away from Paris itself!).
Support Not super sharp and all, and there are people in it, but I like the lighting a lot. Maybe we can say that the people give sense of scale without being to intrusive. -- Benh (talk) 21:36, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, the f/5.6 doesn't do it for me. The unsharpness at the bottom is fine because it's hardly noticeable, but the unsharpness at the top of the monument is quite glaring. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's only about sharpness, notice this happens mostly at corners and that's partly a lense issue, which I can't do much about (beside some careful sharpening, I will try). Is it this dramatic when not viewed at full size but on a (even large) canvas instead? I have other pictures with sharper cross and no people, but I like the framing of this one better. Will see if worth a rework or upload alt. (not many feedback for now!) - Benh (talk) 08:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I strongly suspect this hasn't to do with f/5.6, which is quite narrow for APSC 10mm and would be like opening at f/9.0 on FF 16mm regarding depth of field. - Benh (talk) 08:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose bad light and sharpness. Huge vacuous foreground and little dark, shady, unsharp statue. Miss the wow and the view of the landscape. The people aren't disturbing to me. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 12:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination I think this doesn't interest people :) How sad I am to read comment like "bad light" and huge foreground when I purposely wait for such timing and use such foreground to emphasize the lighting and create the mood... It's much more easy to shoot at noon lighting... - Benh (talk) 21:57, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I found the lighting to be quite good , but sharpness was the problem here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know, il t'est déja arrivé de faire toi-même des commentaires dans lesquels tu critiquais négativement des choix justement spécifiques effectués par l'auteur... Et c'est vrai que ce n'est pas facile à entendre... Bien amicalement, --Jebulon (talk) 17:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC) (sinon, ça va, toi ?)[reply]

Oui, c'est plus dur quand c'est contre soi ;) Mais j'espère que mes critiques sont objectives et sans mauvaise foi. J'essaie aussi toujours de souligner lorsque c'est subjectif. Sur l'éclairage, je suis contre l'éclairage "plat" où tu ne distingues pas le relief et le volume de ce que tu prends. Mais c'est plus affaire de goût, passons sur ça... mais pas sur les gens qui critiquent la netteté pas dramatique d'une image de 18mpix, je trouve ça assez nul... d'autant plus que ça n'est pas la première fois que ça m'arrive. Et puis, une FP ne sera bientôt plus qu'une image nette et rien d'autre... Combien de critiques "génial, l'image est trop nette. FP" et rien d'autre ? À part ça, ça roule. J'espère que toi aussi, et que tes vacances ont été bonnes ;) - Benh (talk) 17:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raccolte Extraeuropee - Passaré 00095 - Maschera cimiero Ejagham - Nigeria.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 16:54:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Raccolte Extraeuropee del Castello Sforzesco - uploaded and nominated by M.casanova -- M.casanova (talk) 16:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- M.casanova (talk) 16:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Marcok (talk) 21:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sachi85 (talk) 09:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The resolution is fantastic, allowing one to closely examine the object to a degree I suspect no visitor to the museum can do. For the purposes of displaying these exhibits freely online I encourage more of these high-resolution professional-quality images. Two negatives are that there are some dust spots in the background and that the presentation on a stand with grey background is a bit sterile. Colin (talk) 11:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Colin. Yann (talk) 13:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 14:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support slightly creepy... The dustspots should (ideally) be eliminated, though they do not bother me much, but i don't get the "sterile background" complaint. Usually background clutter is a negative. Kleuske (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Dustspots removed --M.casanova (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 16:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--JDP90 (talk) 05:42, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Barclays Cycle Hire, St. Mary Axe, Aldgate.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 16:54:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Colin - uploaded by Colin - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kasir (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a quality problem: visible green CA Poco a poco (talk) 19:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I've uploaded a new version. This is upgraded to us Lightroom4's process 2012 and removal of green/purple CA. Colin (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose...because of lack in quality for a standing motif. --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support In order to concentrate on the shapes and patterns rather than detail I chose a wide aperture and focused on the first bicycle. The image is functional too, with the cycle hire sign, clear Barclays logos, and no distracting people. Colin (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition and choice of perspective. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:50, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting composition (per Colin); but the front of the first cycle is obscured , top of seats and some other parts are overexposed. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:22, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good idea but IMO wrong execution (f/2.8), this kind of pictures need a wider DoF. The CA problem got better, though --Poco a poco (talk) 11:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - nice advertisement for Barclays :-) Like the composition and achieved DoF. --Murdockcrc (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Kraft (talk) 16:16, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice try, but what is featurable about this picture? What does it illustrate? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the rhythm of the picture and the composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Žiga (talk) 06:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow. And a bit too blurry at the point of focus (presumabely due to f2.8) --Taraxacum (talk) 15:53, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow ;-) Albertus teolog (talk) 08:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:03, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Contaminacion del Lago de Maracaibo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 18:33:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info This is not a beautiful composition, however, I think it's important to be shown. All by -- The Photographer (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Photographer (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sad but true. --–Makele-90 (talk) 19:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 21:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and tragic. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 04:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is this a stitched file (20MP)? I prefer a 4:3 format as in the original upload. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is a stitched image. I considered it contemplates unite more details, there is greater range of coast, thanks --The Photographer (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Adding the relevant template may be good. This is a good image with enough EV; may be a rare seen in developed countries. But this is a common seen in other places of the world, including our country (although it is shame for me to tell it loud).

Neutral because I prefer a wider format (per Murdockcrc). -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Tragic? Yes. Beautiful? Hell, no! Excellent picture, sure! Kleuske (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was using it in an ironic sense. ;-) King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 12:00, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support something different. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 14:30, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I don't see this as being one of the finest images in commons only because it raises awareness of a hot topic. --Murdockcrc (talk) 14:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Ummm.. Come again? Your reason for opposing is that "it raises awareness"? Besides. I wish it were a hot topic, but, by the looks of it, it ain't. Kleuske (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hi Kleuske. No, I am not opposing it for raising awareness. I made the comment because I have the impression some of the supporting votes are there just because of that. I am opposing it mostly on the grounds that it is a very tight and distracting composition. It has great EV though, but I don't see this as a FP. --Murdockcrc (talk) 16:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:46, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice picture to get published so that the responsible blush, original as well, but no wow Poco a poco (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sad, but no wow. -- -donald- (talk) 07:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow. And I don't like the ratio. Several errors in the stitching (with source photos focus not even matching). - Benh (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good shot but it lacks of wow for FP. --Taraxacum (talk) 13:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Kraft (talk) 13:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The tight crop undercuts the intended effect of this image. Some viewers may even see it as photographic bias, imagining that the scene might improve outside the small frame. It would serve nicely as a part of a photo essay, but on its own it doesn't match the scope of its topic. This would make a very good foreground for some larger picture, one which apparently could show a stunning view of pollution around the lake. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hageri kirik 2012.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2012 at 12:37:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar (talk) 12:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author - Ivar (talk) 12:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Some white parts of the church are overexposed, and the power line in front is distracting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:57, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Main subject is partly hidden, poles and electrical cables are distracting, also the trees in the foreground (on the left-hand side of the frame) are distracting. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:06, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 05:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coventry Cathedral Ruins with Rainbow.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2012 at 20:45:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Walker44, nominated by Peter Weis (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Great lighting, but a tad soft throughout. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:23, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Not every picture needs to be sunny and bright. I love it just the way it is! Perhaps a slight tilt ccw is in order, but that's a minor point. Kleuske (talk) 07:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral Changed my mind. Regrettably, the image is unsharp. Kleuske (talk) 13:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 09:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Artistic, except the bottom right corner. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral good atmosphere but not sharp --Böhringer (talk) 10:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good candidate for WLM 2012, if I remember well 2011 (sorry for irony...)--Jebulon (talk) 20:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not in the competition... Tomer T (talk) 18:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - That was a joke with some negative tone; I guess. :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Indeed !;)--Jebulon (talk) 17:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not fully sharp and has some other minor problems, but with a lot of wow! -- Achird (talk) 08:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning image. Rock drum (talk • contribs) 09:31, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info A sharpened version, by Peter Weis. Rock drum (talk • contribs) 09:52, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. Andy Mabbett (talk) 10:00, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed. Kleuske (talk) 15:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sharpness is still a little lacking, but good enough to Support. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:56, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:58, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SupportThanks for all the support. Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 12:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rock drum (talk • contribs) 15:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great image, beautiful colours. Thehelpfulone 15:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Certainly an eye-catcher. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PierreSelim (talk) 06:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

The chosen alternative is: File:Coventry Cathedral Ruins with Rainbow edit.jpg

File:Gruppo del Brenta - Malga di Andalo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 12:00:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by llorenzi - uploaded by llorenzi - nominated by llorenzi -- Llorenzi (talk) 12:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- As nominator --Llorenzi (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stryn (talk) 13:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Moscow GUM indoor gallery.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 15:40:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Vcarceler - uploaded by Vcarceler - nominated by Vcarceler -- Vcarceler (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Vcarceler (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Noise/sharpness could be better due to the ISO 800 (use a tripod), but overall it's good. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:33, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much noise (ISO800), specially at both sides, and too shallow DoF (f/3.5), definitely you needed a tripod here Poco a poco (talk) 20:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 08:06, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco a Poco. --Kadellar (talk) 18:43, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Naso elegans Oceanopolis.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 17:22:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Citron - uploaded by Citron - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 17:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a very fast fish.-- Citron (talk) 17:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the sharpest, but quite good for underwater photography. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 08:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 16:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portoferraio panorama 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 12:47:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Mihael Grmek - uploaded by Mihael Grmek - nominated by Mihael Grmek -- Mihael Grmek (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mihael Grmek (talk) 12:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I love the cloudy sky and the coast. Not so fond of the foreground, though, which is not so interesting. Kleuske (talk) 14:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Every potential focal point in this photo is truncated. SteveStrummer (talk) 04:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: per Kleuske. --Julian H. (talk/files) 13:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I would like to take such a picture a lot more to the left but tis was as far as i could go and as high as i could go, everything was closed to the public. So that was best in given conditions. Thanks -- Mihael Grmek (User talk:Meho29)
  - The photo is nice, no doubt, and I value the effort that went into it. It might not be possible to take a FP from publicly accessible areas there. That's unfortunate, but doesn't make the composition of this one better. --Julian H. (talk/files) 09:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I agree. I'm not here to beg for FP's or to put almost every picture that i take up for QI and FP. I try to take best photos at given conditions and then i look at photos which are already uploaded to commons and if there is not to many good ones i try to contribute. But I appreciate any comments which are productive and valid, and if photo gets to be FP is OK if not thet's OK to. -- Mihael Grmek (User talk:Meho29)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:28, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shrine at the señor de villaseca de cata church.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2012 at 00:42:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llorenzi (talk) 07:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support There should be a way to make the noise more aesthetic (since we won't get rid of it), but I like the mood. - Benh (talk) 10:36, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I hear you... ISO was high because it is a dark place so noise was inevitable. I was able to remove a lot of it with Lightroom. If it were a b&w image, film grain simulation would have worked! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:24, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Interesting; good feel. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another case where noise takes a back seat. Kleuske (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose creative and very interesting atmospheric work, but technically not good enough. Very noisy (may be okay, but the details are very low, visible e.g. at the photos and the letter below the shrine image) and bad exposure (too harsh contrast between the darkness at top (I see it was dark but it's too extreme here) and the overexposed candles). --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 13:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 08:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per kaʁstn. Tomer T (talk) 16:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Washington Monument 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2012 at 08:41:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by Awersowy - nominated by Albertus teolog -- Albertus teolog (talk) 08:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 08:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- A fairly uninspiring view of this monument, with the flags partially obscured by trees and a crane in the foreground. The image suffers technically from the compact camera's tiny sensor and high NR removing detail. It is fairly easy to find better examples on Commons. For example, File:Washington Monument, Washington, D.C. 04037u original.jpg has much better scenery and File:Washington Monument Dusk Jan 2006.jpg is technically superior. Colin (talk) 11:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment File:Washington Monument, Washington, D.C. 04037u original.jpg is technically inferior; File:Washington Monument Dusk Jan 2006.jpg - Worm's-eye view. Albertus teolog (talk) 14:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is not ok for me. Tight crop at top, trees and cranes in the bottom are also disturbing. I really prefer this kind of composition for such monuments. Moreover the lack of details does not compensate for this. --PierreSelim (talk) 15:48, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Main subject is unsharp, background is pixelated, foreground includes distracting elements (ex: the crane). --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lyapunov-fractal.png, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 07:21:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

$Lyapunov fractal for the string bbbbbbaaaaaa, for the growth parameter region '"`UNIQ--postMath-00000001-QINU`"'. Generated with Mathematica 5.$

Info created by BernardH - uploaded by BernardH - nominated by tausif -- Stausifr (talk) 07:21, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Stausifr (talk) 07:21, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support lovely --Llorenzi (talk) 11:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Math FPs are always good. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 01:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:50, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tamba52 (talk) 15:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 21:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:Népal rana tharu1818a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2012 at 17:43:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Yves Picq - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 17:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Looks great in smaller size but lacks a bit of sharpness at 100% Poco a poco (talk) 18:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Considering this is a full-size 5MP image from a 10-year-old bridge camera, it is pretty good technically. I don't think the lack of sharpness is an issue -- we're too used to seeing downsampled 16MP images. If you downsample this one to 2MP it also looks sharp. The composition is good, with the women, nets and wheat forming an interesting scene. But the camera just failed to catch the top of the stick and the stems of wheat on the RHS are distracting. I think it can be improved with a crop Colin (talk) 20:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Tomer T (talk) 22:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Support Crop. Colin (talk) 20:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 22:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is better. Kleuske (talk) 22:22, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a lot of color noise especially on the woman's face and body. Can that be fixed? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:08, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't notice this noise. I'm really trying though. Tomer T (talk) 07:47, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 08:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks tilted btw, by ok otherwise to me. - Benh (talk) 09:47, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Image is indeed noisy but the composition and EV is excellent. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've now applied a global chroma denoise and selective luminance denoise on the sky and skin. I've also fixed the tilt. Colin (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good now. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I..I.. woww --The Photographer (talk) 19:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 05:37, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ggia (talk) 09:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yarl ✉ 13:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:59, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 21:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 09:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

The chosen alternative is: File:Népal rana tharu1818a Crop.jpg

image:Panoramic Rhine Bonn Rheinhotel Dreesen.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 14:03:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by pehah - uploaded by pehah - nominated by famule -- Famule (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famule (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Insufficient quality - lack of sharpness, visible lens flare, stitching errors, chromatic aberration. --Ivar (talk) 15:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The sharpness is fine: everything's in focus and the hills in the distance would be expected to be a little hazy on a sunny day in September. Remember this is a 115MP image, so pixel peepers should think again. There is some lens flare, which is a shame, though it would be hard to avoid given the position of the sun. But there are numerous stitching errors and people repeated. There is some CA on the RHS building which should be fixable. The building isn't vertical and, assuming a program like Hugin was used, would benefit from some vertical control points. The uneven sky makes me suspect a polariser was used, which isn't a good idea for super wide angle shots. The overall scene isn't that inspiring and I wonder if a panorama taken from another position would be more interesting. Colin (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Famule (talk) 08:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:000704-N-5961C-006 Ship Anchor Maintenance.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2012 at 17:45:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by U.S. Navy - uploaded by BotMultichillT - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 17:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:45, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- The crop is too tight, the left "fin" of the anchor is clipped. —Bruce1ee^talk 05:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's not a bad photo, it is an interesting subject (in a tradition of documentary photography). The technical quality is good. But the composition is just boring and simple, a different angle, crop and composition could have made the picture much better. FP requires more work.--ArildV (talk) 08:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bad crop --Florian Fuchs (talk) 09:14, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --Vamps (talk) 10:45, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buildings on the East side of Mill Street in the Brown's Race Historic District.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 11:19:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by RocPX - nominated by Kadellar -- Kadellar (talk) 11:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 11:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A pity that some of the stitches are so visible. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 14:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't find them, really. --Kadellar (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have found some errors, all correctable. But there is also pretty strong perspective distortion on both sides and upper part is a bit too tight. --Ivar (talk) 15:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Kadellar (talk) 15:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anna's Hummingbird Nest.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 21:31:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Steve Berardi - uploaded by Kersti Nebelsiek - nominated by Kati -- Kati (talk) 21:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kati (talk) 21:31, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Request Please denoise. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:46, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A good one, but besides noise, i think it's also overexposed. --Taraxacum (talk) 11:36, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I just happen to have a very soft spot for humming birds.., --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much noise and bad color temperature. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:32, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nest photographs: while good for science and documentation, I believe they shouldn't be encouraged for photographic merit. Photographing around a nest does cause unwanted disturbance to the bird and may attract predators which is why nest photographs are banned in most popular bird forums and photography contests. On a purely photographic merit, I believe it could have been better with the full nest in the frame. Yathin sk (talk) 09:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:56, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Basel - Münsterpfalz1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 13:08:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 13:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 13:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice and detailed, but I do not like how the bottom left is cut off. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- would you like this version File:Basel - Münsterpfalz3.jpg better? --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:24, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're not talking to me but the other version is definitely better. I don't like how the bottom is cut off either. It may lacks little wow though, and I would crop little sky and bridge out to try to make something more symetrical. Again it's only my tastes. - Benh (talk) 22:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes, please add that one as an alt. I agree with Benh's sentiments about cropping. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:45, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - +1 -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 08:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent; very detailed and sharp. --High Contrast (talk) 20:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 19:08, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I had promoted this one in QIC already, it's a very nice panorama that may be an FP as well. - A.Savin 19:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. I don't mind the left bottom, but also i wouldn't mind a bit more to the right. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言 21:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ra Boe watt?? 06:26, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- WOW! Deutschland über Alles !--Jebulon (talk) 22:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please check your atlas: Basel is in Switzerland, not in Germany. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:55, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Macroglossum stellatarum01(js).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 12:15:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Jerzystrzelecki - uploaded by Jerzystrzelecki - nominated by Jerzystrzelecki -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 12:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Is it Superman? Is it a bird? No! It's ~~Bicycle Repairman~~ a moth. Jokes aside. Spectacular. Kleuske (talk) 14:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice picture, strange animal. But it seems quite noisy, maybe a denoising will help? Tomer T (talk) 15:53, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be nice. It is rather noisy, but i guess you can't take pictures like that using large(r) f-numbers and low(er) iso. This is about speed. To me, it's a pretty good trade-off. Kleuske (talk) 16:18, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quite small (barely meets criteria) and noisy (considering the top notch hardware it was taken with...), with little details left on the subjects themselves. Selective NR on background would help. But a better NR on the whole pic can probably be achieved. I like the catch and framing, so I will definitely support if this is improved, which should be easy. - Benh (talk)
Oppose The blurred foreground flowers are distracting, plus noise, etc. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral nice image, but low quality --Slick (talk) 15:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Keep trying! -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:53, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I can't neglect the efforts here. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support very well executed photograph. I just wonder if higher ISO would have frozen the moth, but then again I love the motion blur on the wings and tail. The flowers appear a little too saturated. Yathin sk (talk) 09:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Oranienbaum Menchikovsky dvorets 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 20:44:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Upeksha - uploaded by Upeksha - nominated by Upeksha -- Upeksha (talk) 20:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Upeksha (talk) 20:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a contrarian composition, with the statue looking out of the picture like that, as if turning his back on the rest. I'm not yet sure wether i like it or not, but compliments for your boldness. Kleuske (talk) 11:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Resolution is way too low. --Ivar (talk) 11:34, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Too small, it needs to be 2 Mpx. Yann (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2012 (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:Mikoyan MiG-17 & Boeing B-47E, Seattle Museum Of Flight, Washington.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 10:37:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Greg Goebel - uploaded by Ze-dan - nominated by Ze-dan -- ze-dan (talk) 10:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ze-dan (talk) 10:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(weak) Support - quite impressive, although a bit low quality. I support it nevertheless. Tomer T (talk) 10:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fair image quality, and the crop is a little too tight. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - important areas (such as the "Air Force" markings) are overexposed. Composition is not FP to me. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Delhi as it looked just before the Rebellion of 1857.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 09:59:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by James Taylor, uploaded and nominated by Yann (talk) 09:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yann (talk) 09:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Slick (talk) 15:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing really distinctive about this; we shouldn't be featuring all historic maps just because they're historic. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Compression artefacts and rather low digitisation quality. Interesting map and definitely worth a rescan. Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 11:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nominationYann (talk) 09:09, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:57, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Insetinundacio.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 09:08:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flooding of the Mediterranean through the Gibraltar Strait 5.3 million years ago.

Info created by Paubahi - uploaded by Paubahi - nominated by Dvdgmz -- Dvdgmz (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dvdgmz (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Davidpar (disc.) 16:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A good piece of art, but I do not feel that it illustrates the subject of the flooding of the Mediterranean well. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The image fits what is explained in en:Zanclean flood, and as far as I can see there aren't topographical mistakes. Why don't you think it illustrates the subject well?--Pere prlpz (talk) 20:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - The brush strokes look haphazard, and I feel a computer graphic (or at least a more photorealistic painting) would be more appropriate for illustrating an encyclopedic article. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment This work is part of a set of illustrations from the same author about the Messinian Mediterranean salinity crisis. The illustrations were supervised by an expert to avoid scientific errors. I think the image is scientifically rigorous (according to current knowledge) and representationally well solved; but if you think that computer graphics would be more appropriate I can't say anything about it.--Dvdgmz (talk) 14:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Tomer T (talk) 06:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting subject, but File:Roger Pibernat - landscape - messianic med-1024x768.jpg is a better illustration. Yann (talk) 08:22, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support the image has been reviewed by an expert and illustrates the subject fairly well.--Arnaugir (talk) 08:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Agriocnemis pygmaea male, Burdwan, West Bengal, India 14 03 2012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2012 at 10:07:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Agriocnemis pygmaea male, a very small (approximately 20mm) apple green damselfly with black thoracic stripes orange colored terminal abdominal segments. Common in marshes, ponds, and sea shore. Darts among vegetation and flies very close to the ground. Distributed throughout the Oriental, Australian regions and Pacific islands. Taken at Burdwan, West Bengal, India. Created / uploaded / nominated by JDP90 (talk) 10:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 10:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice. Tomer T (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - To me the image is tremendously noisy. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Reduced noise. Thank you. --JDP90 (talk) 18:13, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:30, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great details for such a small subject (less than 20mm long; 1-2mm thick). -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:10, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Attacus atlas London Zoo 01118-2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2012 at 05:58:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Fully Grown (Attacus atlas, female) from London Zoo. The Atlas moth (Attacus atlas) is a large saturniid moth found in the tropical and subtropical forests of Southeast Asia, and common across the Malay archipelago. Atlas moths are considered the largest moths in the world in terms of total wing surface area. Their wingspans are also amongst the largest, reaching over 25 cm (10 in). Females are appreciably larger and heavier. Created by Nevit Dilmen - Edited by Hic et nunc on my request at Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop - nominated by me. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 06:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 09:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's very nice and detailed, but the lighting is mostly from the front flash which renders a dark background and a flat subject with too even and cold lighting (albeit wings are flat u'd say). A good quality and useful picture, but missing a better light imo. - Benh (talk) 09:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This photo was noimnated by myself which ended only half a day ago with 4 supports including yours, 2 opposes and 1 neutral but the picture was not promoted. I see you have re nominated it after just half a day after editing it. As this was first nominated by me having only closed half a day ago I feel that you could have given me some advice on what I could do to change it and to make it better rather than re producing it and nominating it yourself. I feel a little disappointed 8( --Danesman1 (talk) 21:02, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply; I was away for three days. I didn't edited the image. I just raised a request at Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop with the suggestions by the people here. And I will be added it as an ALT if I get back the new version at-least three days prior to the end of the original nomination. Lot of my friends here too edited my works (I really don't like to call them mine; "our" instead, because every work here should be considered as The Common's) and I really appreciate it even as an overwrite over the existing file. Sorry again if I hurt your feeling because I have no intention to do so. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for your reply on my talk page. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Squirrel Monkey business.jpg

I'm neither here nor there on the image in question, but I like monkeys, they are not prone to mischief. There are not enough monkeys without causing mischief in pictures on commons. I would like to see more monkeys. The giraffe, butterfly and monkey all live in the same Zoo, I could take or leave the giraffe. Monkey that has the charm. Penyulap ☏ 18:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your work is very creative but not suitable for an insect profile. BTW, I think you forgot to give proper credits to the original author(s) in file description. :) (suspense "6-1"; and 2 days to go!) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alas I cannot upload large files, so full resolution of my cutting out would need to be sent. But the wing near the monkey nose is cut out very sharp, and I linked the files in description. there are no fields for components. Penyulap ☏ 11:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yann (talk) 06:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:17, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Defense.gov photo essay 100102-A-6365W-388.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 13:12:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Teddy Wade - uploaded by Slick-o-bot - nominated by Slick -- Slick (talk) 13:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I dont know the reason, I like it.-- Slick (talk) 13:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice expression. Humane portrait. Good quality. Tomer T (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Very great captured portrait! While looking at, it brings out a lot of feelings for some reason.(Famule (talk) 14:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Sorry, but you look like not eligible to vote - Benh (talk) 14:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ivar (talk) 15:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Good work. Kleuske (talk) 12:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:24, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 09:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 10:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support badass--Kürbis (✔) 13:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Diplacodes trivialis, West Bengal, India 13 09 2012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 08:06:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Diplacodes trivialis female. A small greenish yellow dragonfly with black markings. Abdominal markings are broader and continued on to segments 8-10. The 10th segment and anal appendages are completely yellow. One of the commonest dragonflies in gardens, fields, playgrounds. This dragonfly usually perches on the ground and rarely flies above 1m. Found throughout Oriental region and Pacific islands. Created / uploaded / nominated by JDP90 (talk) 08:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 08:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good picture. Some parts of the wings are OOF but it's not too distracting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I feel it's not distinctive enough among many dragonfly pictures. Tomer T (talk) 07:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most female skimmers are either brown or yellow. Only males are more distinct and have colors like red, blue and green. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I meant it doesn't have enough 'wow', looking at other dragonfly pictures. Tomer T (talk) 17:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - True for me too; the background is also not very attractive. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:44, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:24, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support so schlecht ist das nicht --Böhringer (talk) 14:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:28, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrew Gray (talk) 10:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Hallig Hooge, Germany, view from the Backenswarft.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2012 at 14:23:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose posterization in the shadows. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 15:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ same here, strange blue dots on the shadows. Interesting idea otherwise, but maybe would have been better applied to some other subject. - Benh (talk) 16:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Neutral. I'd have loved the shadow pattern to be something less abstract. But again nice idea and mood. - Benh (talk) 14:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above, plus poor lighting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thanks for information. I made an update without posterization in the shadows. Please check it. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support after correction Albertus teolog (talk) 07:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A picture that puts a smile on my face. It doesn't always have to be something extra-special. Kleuske (talk) 11:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it. However, horizon is titled slightly clockwise. Can this be fixed?Colin (talk) 12:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for information. I made an update with an exactly horizontal horizon. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like a Flickr front page explore! -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 14:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It's a very creative composition. But if the main subject of this image (as described in the caption) is the town in the background, then clothing makes for a very distracting foreground. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:20, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Info a Hallig is not a town but a slightly elevated piece of land in the Wadden Sea that's not flooded every high tide. Kleuske (talk) 09:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 18:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- I've never been there, but this picture makes want to visit this area. ;) MartinD (talk) 08:43, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Do. It's really worth it. Kleuske (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I really don't like it! --Llorenzi (talk) 17:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Very helpful. Thanks. Kleuske (talk) 20:24, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see only 4 oppose. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Lions Family Portrait Masai Mara.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2012 at 22:08:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by myself -- Benh (talk) 22:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I haven't seen many pictures of Lions lately. I think this triple portrait is quite nice, even though only the one in the middle is sharp. It shows Lions' social behaviour, has nice morning lighting and nice details where in focus. Will you agree? ;) -- Benh (talk) 22:08, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent capture! -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 05:07, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 05:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Not that much sharp; but a good one among the available. Moved to Panthera leo -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eerrh... it's at least as sharp as if no more than your macro below, and at a far bigger size... But at least it's "only" a neutral ;) - Benh (talk)

Please don’t compare a macro (subject size=1sqr. cm.) with a telephoto (400mm) or wide-angle and don’t forget to oppose my works if they feel inferior to you. And if you entertain arguments, it is not my business here. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We're here to discuss, in good faith, and when something seems wrong, I open my mouth. I don't see why I wouldn't compare a macro and a tele, sharpness applies to any pic. U don't encounter DOF in your macro as far as I can tell so there's no mitigating issues, and I could point you to hundreds of sharper macros on Commons... And I didn't oppose because it wasn't unsharp to be point I felt like so. - Benh (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I too like discussions as far as it is friendly and help to prosper. Here it feel a bit negative as “my image is better than yours” because the low quality of my work no way help to improve your work. No problem now; I may be a bit disturbed at first glance. Sorry. Coming to the point: I usually compare images with exact same subject even available outside Commons. Here with [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], and [9]. Hope it helps. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:54, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No no, no such thing as my image is better than yours. I've tried a bit of macro pics and I think I realize how challenging it can be. But "my image is sharper than yours", yes, definitely. It's objective thing. My hardware helps too, so nothing about skills. Just that I'm sick of seeing 2mpix pictures being considered sharp, and 18mpix pictures seen as "a bit soft" (more true for the below nom). We must compares things fairly. At this rate, I'll just downscale my pics to 5mpix before submitting and I'm sure that many "qualified" reviewers will suddenly "wow" at the sharpness. Notice all the examples you refer to are less than 3mpix, with the exception of the 4th which is the closest to 18mpix, but which is not (edit: much) sharper (which is what we talk about). But yes most do have more wow factor than this one imo. - Benh (talk) 09:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not many people upload original files on such places; but they are good for comparing lot of other factors. And some of them are taken at 1000mm which is not affordable to many. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question Eerrrh again... I think I made a mistake in the caption and now wonder if the one in the middle is not a young male... can anyone help? - Benh (talk) 08:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yep, the guy in the middle is a male, starting to get a mohawk prior to a mane. --Taraxacum (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought... Thanks for confirming. Updated the caption. - Benh (talk) 12:33, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The alpha lion distracts located behind the scene, he observed blur, is on another plane and almost asleep. Lions forward, possibly because of their youth, are more awake. The front bush too distracting. I imagine making these lions watching a sunrise, however, lions or profile located laterally. There is a body in the right half of the region that appears to be a cut lion. It seems that the purpose of this is to capture a family. Sounds like a good decision and difficult to achieve in its natural state --The Photographer (talk) 13:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested to see the whole setting to give u an idea. - Benh (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, nice shoots!!. Could be cool to see all the images uploaded in commons --The Photographer (talk) 15:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ;) But it's such a pain to upload to Commons... if only there were a plugin like the Flickr one to Lightroom... - Benh (talk) 16:20, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to let laziness and use this tool --The Photographer (talk) 17:29, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Knew about it thanks. Still, from Lightroom I'd have to export to JPEG and than use this tool which requires additional caption (won't read the one in the EXIF). Compared to clicking one button for Flickr ;)... But u r right, it's nothing more than laziness. - Benh (talk) 09:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is a nice picture but I don't see any exceptional value that places it above numerous other quality images on the wiki. Also, the large rock/thing on the far right is distracting and makes it feel like you're missing something from the scene. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:27, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I guess the gal on the left moved as you took the pic, since it unsharp compared to the dude on the center. But hey, this is wildlife photography, isn't it? I know how challenging it is and how quick things happen. Composition it a bit too tight, but still FP to me. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:34, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's more DOF issue. They look the same size because of the focal length (it's a full frame equiv. 640mm), so we expect them to be in same plane, but they are not - Benh (talk) 21:53, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Kadellar (talk) 18:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice one Benh :) --Muhammad (talk) 16:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Will end up as a minority. It's a good photograph, but not a great photograph IMO. I feel the light is too flat and there's too much distraction with the foreground plant and the background leaves without a nice bokeh. The highlights are also close to being blown out. The cats in the front and back are out of focus just enough to make looking at the image difficult. Still, a very good picture. :) Yathin sk (talk) 09:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never realized the left one was actually in front ;) Also, flat light would be when it's evenly lit. Here we have morning lighting coming from the side. It's fine that you don't like it though (albeit disappointing to me of course) - Benh (talk) 16:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tend use flat very broadly. Late morning, early evening light in tropics tend to be a lot flatter (or harsher if you prefer) than in higher latitudes; It's unfortunate because there's only half an hour or so around dask/dawn with that angled light. Sorry about the disappointment but I the reasoning behind my vote. Ultimately, the person who matters is photographer himself/herself -- if you're happy with what you've shot then it's a fine photograph, no matter what anyone else says! :) Yathin sk (talk) 17:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Kürbis (✔) 13:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Meripilus giganteus (Karst 1882).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2012 at 13:36:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support great. Tomer T (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 20:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--JDP90 (talk) 09:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 12:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 21:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Kürbis (✔) 13:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi

File:Magnificent CME Erupts on the Sun - August 31.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 06:53:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by NASA - uploaded & nominated by Originalwana (talk) 06:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support As nominator Originalwana (talk) 06:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llorenzi (talk) 10:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me the WOW factor is great here! First I thought this was an artist's impression. Then again, the picture is rather small, it only has a normal wallpaper size. With the equipment of NASA I think the original file is or could be much bigger in size. There are also small artifacts on the left. --Ximonic (talk) 11:07, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The original file is 4096², but it shows the whole sun. Because this is a small detail, the resolution is not that impressive and there is some noise. --Julian H. (talk/files) 12:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Julian H. (talk/files) 12:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:58, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --— Preceding unsigned comment added by King of Hearts (talk • contribs) 07:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 09:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Saw it on Flickr and was about to import here and nominate. Big, big WOW -Benh (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatives[edit]

I used the original files to generate two versions with less / less apparent noise. The crop is a bit less tight but that could be changed easily.

This one uses the same blending method, but is less noisy (but darker)
This one uses an overlay blending method and is therefore also a lot less noisy, but shows detail in different areas.

What do you think? --Julian H. (talk/files) 12:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy

File:Wulfenite mexique.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 07:49:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Didier Descouens - uploaded by Didier Descouens - nominated by Alborzagros -- Alborzagros 07:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alborzagros 07:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would crop the blurred foreground at the bottom. Yann (talk) 05:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yann's comment is right. I change punctually the backrgound in a few hours. Thank you to Alborzagros for his taste for mineralogy --Archaeodontosaurus
  - Artifact corrected. Cropping is not desirable because the background blur is voluntary. It was easy to make a stack of three additional photos for the entire image sharp. Leaving gray areas, the two crystals stand out more.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:31, 19 September 2012 (UTC) (talk) 10:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yathin sk (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Citron (talk) 17:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kleuske (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Please don't crop the foreground.--Jebulon (talk) 22:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support ----Upeksha (talk) 07:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 13:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks and Minerals

File:Festung Hohensalzburg bei Dämmerung-3.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 16:25:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Florian Fuchs - uploaded by Florian Fuchs - nominated by Florian Fuchs -- Florian Fuchs (talk) 16:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Florian Fuchs (talk) 16:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:49, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Yann (talk) 14:45, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too dark (esp. compared to a FP of the same motive), the right dark area is disturbing, too much sky. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 17:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too dark, tiled, lacking sharpness --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice view, but I agree with Wladyslaw and Carschten. --Kadellar (talk) 09:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination

File:Zámek Lednice (Castle Lednice).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 13:25:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Ivan Stanimirov - nominated by thebane5 -- 147.91.231.5 13:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- 147.91.231.5 13:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Please log in to vote. Yann (talk) 13:52, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Far too harsh, take it easy on the brightness/contrast controls. There's a creepy, floating left arm on the right side of the picture, and, rejecting the hypothesis you may have fotographed a ghost, i surmise it's a stitching error. Kleuske (talk) 17:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Really nice experiment! But I agree with Kleuske about the contrast and the stitching error. Therefore: this is not a FP for me. -- MJJR (talk) 21:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:4 cilindros y museo BMW, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-28, DD 02.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2012 at 09:37:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info BMW Tower, commonly known as "the 4 cylinders" is the headquarters of the BMW Group, Munich, Germany. All by me, Poco a poco (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very simple composition in my opinion, and oversharpened (not that big an issue, but easy fix). - Benh (talk) 09:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It's FP to me but it has too much CA. As per above, it is oversharpened. Please correct. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for your reviews. Ok, you have convinced me. I have reduced sharpness by 1/3 and looked for a better CA rework (which I couldn't see at 100%) Poco a poco (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To me the jaggy lines are still there. And it still looks overall over sharpened. Not too big an issue, because hardly noticeable if viewed at as a whole, but a bit of a disappointment because it's easy fix. I don't think there are CA, but mostly artifact of the over sharpening (and since you now use LR4, you probably use the auto CA correction feature). - Benh (talk) 22:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you still tell me that you see jaggy lines, then I would think about looking for a new hobby Poco a poco (talk) 22:59, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please check buildings in the background, upper right part before considering so ;) - Benh (talk) 23:06, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SupportI think that this picture deserves more than only this interesting debate... It is a FP for me. No noticeable issues in my opinion, great point of view, very good light (yes !), high encyclopedical value. I don't know what kind of less "simple composition" could be expected in this case.--Jebulon (talk) 16:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ A good view to describe the entire subject and probably a good candidate to replace the existing VI; but I prefer this view for FP. Just my taste. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Again I'm changing my mind per Kadellar. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I usually agree with Jee but not this time. I quite like this as I find the perspective dramatic. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; and the inclusion of the second structure with the 'BMW' logo is very wise. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:48, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Deserving to be featured , I guess. --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support This view is quite impressive, aerial views are not so common. --Kadellar (talk) 19:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 10:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not sure I like the early afternoon lighting; looks a bit washed out to me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 05:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Amphiprion sandaracinos on Heteractis crispa.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 15:58:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Citron - uploaded by Citron - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 15:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Citron (talk) 15:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 19:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kleuske (talk) 08:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 17:26, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 19:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 13:29, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard [®] 06:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice --The Photographer (talk) 12:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish

File:Defense.gov photo essay 080212-F-1644L-126.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2012 at 06:39:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Jeremy T. Lock - uploaded by Slick-o-bot - nominated by Slick -- Slick (talk) 06:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Slick (talk) 06:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Interesting image, but I don't see the EV value of it, and it appears to not be used on any Wikimedia page yet. --Murdockcrc (talk) 17:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the subject, it is refreshing from other nominations, but it is not good enough for FP: the left crop is bad, and the deep of field is too short. I'd like to have the whole hand in focus. Yann (talk) 04:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- When I had read the description I saw the point ;) but I can't really see in what Wikipedia article this picture could be used. MartinD (talk) 08:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brilliant DOF for me. The current usage of the image is not a requirement here. I feel a bit reddish though. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:European Garden Spider Kruisspin.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 21:31:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Rooijen - uploaded by Rooijen - nominated by Rooijen -- Rooijen (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rooijen (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is a bit out of focus. Post-processing also seems a bit strange, the outer edges are markedly darker than the center, a bit unnatural. Jujutacular (talk) 02:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see dust specks, chromatic aberration and whites look blown. Also the vignetting seems a little uneasy on the eye for this photograph. It's a good photograph nonetheless. :) Yathin sk (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Axial chromatic aberration and per above. --Julian H. (talk/files) 10:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unsharp, CA. --Vamps (talk) 10:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Junonia lemonias DSF upper by Kadavoor.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2012 at 09:47:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Junonia lemonias, also known as the Lemon Pansy, is a common nymphalid butterfly found in South Asia. The Lemon pansy is a very active butterfly and can be seen basking with its wings open facing the sun. It sits very low to the ground and can be approached easily. It feeds with its wings half open. It is a fairly strong flier and flies close to the ground with rapid wingbeats and often returns to settle back in the same spots. All by me. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Very nice. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 09:14, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- There's that bug bar and Jee jumping over it. Saffron Blaze (talk) 11:53, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--ArildV (talk) 17:28, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 21:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 12:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Kürbis (✔) 14:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- really nice photo showing the whole of the butterfly with the colours of the wings in good detail.--Danesman1 (talk) 20:26, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Red Hot Chili Peppers - Rock in Rio Madrid 2012 - 32.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2012 at 18:26:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Kadellar -- Kadellar (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Obviously, it's tilted. I looked for more dynamism. --Kadellar (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 16:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I wish you had tilted it the other way. The phrase "geezer going down" keeps playing through my mind and he deserves better. Kleuske (talk) 10:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Taagepera mõisa peahoone2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 13:51:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar (talk) 13:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author Ivar (talk) 13:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 14:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent lighting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Very good colours. --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think crop a bit tight at the bottom, but nice lighting. - Benh (talk) 09:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:40, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 13:29, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support As others.--Jebulon (talk) 00:09, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 12:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Dlieja sacun Urtijëi Santa Dorotea .JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 16:01:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Moroder - uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 09:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 10:16, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 08:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 06:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice, valuable and interesting.--Jebulon (talk) 23:37, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 13:30, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media#Religion

File:Chilean Flamingo, Phoenicopterus chilensis; "Spotlight"; Texas.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 00:36:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by - uploaded by - nominated by Kati Fleming -- Kati Fleming (talk) 00:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kati Fleming (talk) 00:36, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Body cutoff abruptly near the tail feathers, black clipping, blown areas (on beak), dust specs (probably could be cleaned; invert colors to help spot them), beak almost disappearing into background. Not considered for my vote, but I am not a fan of photographing captive animals. :) Yathin sk (talk) 09:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crop, underexposed. --Vamps (talk) 10:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Florian Fuchs (talk) 11:23, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To dark background so you cannot see bits of the bird which merges with background ie. its leg. To much crop with rear of bird cut off and same with its feet.--Danesman1 (talk) 20:40, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:00, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wuppertal - Werth - Mahnmal zur Barmer Erklärung 06 ies.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2012 at 21:09:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by ies - uploaded by ies - nominated by Atamari -- Atamari (talk) 21:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Atamari (talk) 21:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting, but the blurred arm on the foreground is disturbing. Yann (talk) 06:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's one of those occasions where disturbing may actually be a good thing(tm). It lends the picture a sense of dimensionality. Kleuske (talk) 12:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too narrow depth of field makes it distracting. Freedom to share (talk) 17:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:58, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aarhus Rådhus tårn.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 12:58:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Villy Fink Isaksen - uploaded by Villy Fink Isaksen - nominated by Villy Fink Isaksen -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 12:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 12:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 15:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 15:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kleuske (talk) 16:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support wonderful illustration of an interesting architecture --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kati 13:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like the choice of view. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼署名の宣言 21:34, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 13:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 09:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great  Richard  [®]  06:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:33, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Brooklyn Museum 73.178 Bwoom Mask.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 06:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Brooklyn Museum - uploaded and nominated by M.casanova -- M.casanova (talk) 06:25, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- M.casanova (talk) 06:25, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very interesting subject, but too small. Yann (talk) 06:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)}}[reply]
Question Why is it "too small"? Image has at least 2 real megapixels of information (1,536 * 1,312 = 2,015,232). --M.casanova (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps the opinion should not be interpreted as "too small according to the guidelines", but "too small for my taste". Perhaps we're spoiled by recent hi-res images of african masks. Kleuske (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I uploaded from different sources :) --M.casanova (talk) 10:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose downsampled/cropped. regards, Peter Weis (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Resolution is enough to appreciate the many details. Most museums make available images - when they do! - with lower resolution. --Marcok (talk) 14:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Marcok. At least it's not a *$@#^ butterfly. Kleuske (talk) 12:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--JDP90 (talk) 05:42, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support cool dude--Kürbis (✔) 13:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Wallers - Fosse Arenberg des mines d'Anzin (395).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 09:34:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Schaft Arenberg 2, occasionaly use for cinema (Germinal and L'Affaire Salengro). Photo take from the pit Arenberg 3 - 4. More description in French in the page of the file. Created by JÄNNICK Jérémy - uploaded by JÄNNICK Jérémy - nominated by JÄNNICK Jérémy -- JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 09:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 09:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality (maybe a bit "soft", more contrast could help), useful, historical, high encyclopedic value. + I like it.--Jebulon (talk) 16:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Jebulon. An English file description may attract more reviewers. I read the French wiki page with the help of Google Chrome. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have translated the descriptions in English (I can't do better, my level in English is not very good). JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 08:20, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 10:22, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Herbert Lake beim Icefields Parkway.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 15:40:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Florian Fuchs - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 15:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Downsampled/cropped. Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 15:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I like it very much, but I would retouch out the branches on the left side, should not be too difficult --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd be happy for help. I have no idea how to do it. Tomer T (talk) 20:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Since it is my picture, you don't have to do anything. I am going to upload a new version in the afternoon, where I retouch out the branches on the left side. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 04:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - new version uploaded: higher resolution, 3:2 aspect ratio, removed the branches. I hope everybody is happy now. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 13:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Support Thanks. Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 14:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks Florian. Tomer T (talk) 20:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 10:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 16:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the high resolution and good aspect ratio. The branches (grass?) on foreground were not a problem for me. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 09:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Jebulon (talk) 23:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Colin (talk) 13:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 20:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Lovely photo, clear with nice colours.--Danesman1 (talk) 20:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Very nice indeed, but a bit disappointing at full size. I don't find the focus point (nothing is really sharp), and the shadowed mountainsides are very noisy, IMO. Very good mood however, and outstanding composition and light.--Jebulon (talk) 00:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 00:03, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Douves forteresse Rhodes.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 23:47:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 23:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support View of the moats of the medieval fortifications at Rhodes, island of Rhodes, Greece.-- Jebulon (talk) 23:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Neutre car sinon c'est "contre". Grosso modo pas de "WOW". Et bien sûr, je ne suis pas fan de la lumière. Étrange choix de format (presque carré ??) aussi, et je ne suis pas sûr de saisir l'idée derrière la composition ? En tout cas les vacances ont été bonnes on dirait ;) (No wow, not fan of the lighting, and strange format ratio. I'm not sure to get the idea behind the composition) - Benh (talk) 17:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Is really an idea needed behind the composition ? I'm afraid we will disagree everytime about the question of the light in photography...why must light be always soooo complicated to generate a "wow" ? Cette photo a plus d'un an, j'ai pris d'autres vacances depuis... Qui ont été bonnes aussi, d'ailleurs ! On déjeune ensemble, un de ces quatre ? -Jebulon (talk) 19:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oulah oui, pas vu la date... et je me disais bien que cet été était plus "péninsule hibérique". Pour le déjeuner, la suite par mail ;) For light, I think that a more side lighting emphasizes volume and textures, in addition to giving a moody atmosphere. We won't agree because it's mostly personal tastes matter I guess. - Benh (talk) 19:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I understand, but how could I have a "more side lighting"? Please see the shadow at right...--Jebulon (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful! -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 09:12, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good image, but nothing special, no WOW. --Karelj (talk) 21:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I may admit negative votes (because I nominate here for appreciation), but frankly, this kind of comments does not generate any WOW in my mind, and is really completely ... useless (?)...--Jebulon (talk) 22:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've (big wow); because I'm a big fan of stone arts! -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:40, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Maria Plain Panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2012 at 18:24:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Maria Plain; -- Böhringer (talk) 18:24, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 18:24, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I love the colours and the scene. But this projection hasn't worked. A cylindrical projection should be possible where the verticals are absolutely straight and the horizontals through the building are also. Looks a bit over sharpened too. The perspective on the RHS building is quite extreme, which might be unavoidable if one is forced to take its picture from close-up, but if you can stand further back then a much more natural perspective should be possible. -- Colin (talk) 18:57, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your comment, here I have nothing to sharpen --Böhringer (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I really don't like the distortions. Can't you switch projection in ur stitching soft? Did you have to take it from this close? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benh (talk • contribs)
Oppose per Colin. --Vamps (talk) 10:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Variante[edit]

Oppose I really don't like the distortions. Can't you switch projection in ur stitching soft? Did you have to take it from this close? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benh (talk • contribs)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bad Säckingen - Fridolinsmünster2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 18:41:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 18:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 18:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, I don't think this choice of composition works; it looks unbalanced. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:07, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The two towers and the top of the roof are corresponding each other. For me it's balanced, but this is my subjective opinion. What would you suggest to make this picture more balanced? --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:08, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think having more lower parts and less sky would be better. I guess it just looks a bit oddly out of place. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - what about the general view of this position File:Bad Säckingen - Fridolinsmünster3.jpg? --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think the general view looks better. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Barques lac Val Joyeux Chateau-la-Valliere.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2012 at 07:26:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Myrabella - uploaded by Myrabella - nominated by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 07:26, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Myrabella (talk) 07:26, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nice. —Bruce1ee^talk 07:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great feel. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 10:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 11:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 13:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support idyllic--Kürbis (✔) 14:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 15:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 16:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 17:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not as Joyeux a title suggests ;), but perfectly matches my current mood. Looks tilted to the right. - Benh (talk) 22:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm glad that you've noticed the contrast between the name and the atmosphere of the place :) Tilt fixed. --Myrabella (talk) 21:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reminds me a little bit of the POTY winner last year. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:06, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oh que oui !--Jebulon (talk) 23:21, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 09:59, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellente qualité. Félicitations! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 20:26, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very atmospheric, pleasing to the eye & a very high quality image. --Gavin Collins (talk) 15:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:56, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles

File:Gruppo del Brenta 01.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2012 at 07:48:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by llorenzi - uploaded by llorenzi - nominated by llorenzi -- Llorenzi (talk) 07:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author -- Llorenzi (talk) 07:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 10:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:08, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ruins in Gardene.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2012 at 07:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Kikos - uploaded by Kikos - nominated by Kikos -- Kikos (talk) 07:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kikos (talk) 07:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llorenzi (talk) 07:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 08:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's really nice, but it has strong chromatic aberration on the right side. --Ivar (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. -Kikos (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I like the composition and the colors, but the wires ruin the picture. Could you remove them? Then crop the pole at the right, and it will be great. Yann (talk) 05:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thats not necessery. Wires are integral part of this industrial landscape. -Kikos (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ralf Roleček 20:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- I think this is a really nice photo and best left how it is, why edit and remove something from a picture,by doing that makes it not a true picture of the location. The picture reminds me of something you may find on a christmas card.--Danesman1 (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ScAvenger (Jānis Vilniņš) (talk) 09:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Edgars2007 (talk) 12:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:07, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Stoeprand, Fietspad, Weegbree.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2012 at 10:58:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info All by Kleuske (talk) 10:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC) -- Kleuske (talk) 10:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Kleuske (talk) 10:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't see the "wow" factor in this, and the early afternoon light makes it look washed out. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:57, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marienburg Castle in summer.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2012 at 21:27:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor midday lighting. Also, it looks like contrast was rather low when the image was taken and then was bumped up in postprocessing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Michael Gäbler (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mineral de la luz guanajuato.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2012 at 00:59:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bell-ringer yaroslavl 2012.ogv, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2012 at 20:38:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by AKA MBG - uploaded by AKA MBG - nominated by AKA MBG -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 20:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 20:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:54, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sofia kyrka September 2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2012 at 14:37:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 14:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 14:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 16:00, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Something in the perspective disturbs me, but I don't know what...--Jebulon (talk) 17:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Looks like it's falling backwards, probably because the camera was pointed upward. --Ivar (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The crop in the upper part is too tight and for a perspective correction there is no playroom Poco a poco (talk) 19:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like a camera position at par with the courtyard and see that part too. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the proposal. The church is almost 80 meters high and the courtyard small, so it would be a very extreme angle. The church is built on top of a hill, in a park with old and tall trees 1.--ArildV (talk) 07:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the reply and show me the whole view. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 07:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New version uploaded with stronger perspetive corretion.--ArildV (talk) 10:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support this one is better, very nice --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the crop at the top is too tight. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--77.190.123.52 13:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to sign in.--Kürbis (✔) 13:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Tomer T (talk) 12:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:53, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:20100723 Miyajima 4904.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2012 at 22:37:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Jakubhal - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 22:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 22:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too many people/photographers in the picture --Llorenzi (talk) 10:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- They give scale. Tomer T (talk) 20:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Tomer --Martin Kraft (talk) 08:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:11, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment geo coordinates point at the main shrine buildings and should be moved a bit to the north west where the torii is. bamse (talk) 19:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Presence of people emphasizes structure height --Kati 7:03, 19 September 2012
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Upeksha (talk) 20:48, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Karelj (talk) 21:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting comp and lighting. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support At first I thought it was smaller, so people are useful here. --Kadellar (talk) 09:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive--Kürbis (✔) 14:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Citron (talk) 19:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Kikos (talk) 13:02, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 08:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:2012-09-09 17-47-06-nd-bas-ronchamp.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 16:45:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created and uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The main altar of the church Notre-Dame du Bas in Ronchamp, Haute-Saône, France. By User:ComputerHotline.-- Jebulon (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:12, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose overdone perspective distortion correction (I know it's straight, but at 6mm it doesn't look good now and it's unsharp at top). I don't like the (clinched) crop either, the cut off windows on the left and right are disturbing. I'd prefer at longer focus length (for less distortions and a more blurred background). The symmetry and the quality are quite though, but not a FP to me. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 20:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support although it's unsharp at top. I downloaded the image and cropped the top and a bit bottom part. I like it very much. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too much distortion, and top out of focus (or unsharp). --PierreSelim (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:19, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:2012-09-14 14-51-01-PA00101784-egl-st-maimboeuf.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 09:34:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by ComputerHotline - uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by ComputerHotline -- ComputerHotline (talk) 09:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ComputerHotline (talk) 09:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it :-) --PierreSelim (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Interesting; but is there a possibility to climb over a ladder and achieve a better AOV? (Am I a bit wild? ) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:16, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:2012-09-14 15-01-04-PA00101784-egl-st-maimboeuf.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 09:32:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by ComputerHotline - uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by ComputerHotline -- ComputerHotline (talk) 09:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ComputerHotline (talk) 09:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Vamps (talk) 10:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great colors and sharpness, but it seems that a little perspective correction is needed. It looks titled to the right. Yann (talk) 05:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:22, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:54, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:FEMA - 15082 - Photograph by Jocelyn Augustino taken on 09-08-2005 in Louisiana.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2012 at 09:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Jocelyn Augustino/FEMA, uploaded by BotMultichillT, nominated by Yann (talk) 09:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yann (talk) 09:25, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting but no FA-quality. Kleuske (talk) 09:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:16, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Partal pavilion bassin detail.jpg

File:Hibiscus rosa-sinensis blossom.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2012 at 19:37:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Kreuzschnabel - uploaded by Kreuzschnabel - nominated by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:37, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:37, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:41, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bākūžkalna vējdzirnavas.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2012 at 10:47:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Kikos - uploaded by Kikos - nominated by Kikos -- Kikos (talk) 10:47, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kikos (talk) 10:47, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please see the notes. --Ivar (talk) 11:14, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -Kikos (talk) 11:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ceriagrion coromandelianum, Burdwan, West Bengal, India 23 09 2012 (1).JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2012 at 13:13:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Coromandel Marsh Dart Ceriagrion coromandelianum (male) is a medium sized pale green damselfly with yellow tail. Common along the banks of ponds, rivers and canals. Breeds in shallow water bodies with profuse growth of grass and other aquatic plants. Flies throughout the year and distributed throughout the Oriental region. Taken at Burdwan, West Bengal, India. Created / uploaded / nominated by JDP90 (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 13:44, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot, my congratulations, your are doing better and better! Poco a poco (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'm trying to do better. Happy that you like it and glad about your comment. -- JDP90 (talk) 18:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hope it's not me but WB seems leaning towards cool side. Might be how you like it to be seen... - Benh (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. As you can see in EXIF, WB was put in auto and I have not changed WB later. Should I warm it up a little bit? -- JDP90 (talk) 18:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think, but I may be wrong - Benh (talk) 21:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
IMO light parts of the leaf are too blue. Look on the alt version. Przykuta → [edit] 20:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems better. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Amazing photo, how did you do that so close up without it flying away, very impressed.--Danesman1 (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice --Citron (talk) 20:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:09, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support But I've some doubt about the sex. I can't see the secondary genital below the thorax as here. Further I think the male would have more yellow thorax and tail. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 08:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May be, but if it is a female then the thorax should be pale green which is yellow here. Might be due to aging the tail looks like that? Thank you for your opinion. If you are sure about the sex you can change it in the description. --JDP90 (talk) 08:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thorax (the part between head and abdomen) is pale green here (male has also a yellowish green colour). Yes; the tail shows some aging; but the golden brown colour instead of yellow is another property of female. I think an expert can (i'm not; but hope somebody here) easily tell the sex by checking the genitals. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 09:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

File:Loos-en-Gohelle - Fosse n° 11 - 19 des mines de Lens (085).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2012 at 16:47:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Headframe of the shaft 11 of the Compagnie des mines de Lens, photographied from the spoil tip 74, 11 de Lens Est, Loos-en-Gohelle, Pas-de-Calais, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, France. Black and white. Created by JÄNNICK Jérémy - uploaded by JÄNNICK Jérémy - nominated by JÄNNICK Jérémy -- JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 16:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 16:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The file has now an English description. JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 08:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But why this file is in black & white? -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 10:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I realise always two category of pictures : when the weather is sunny et without clouds, I take photos in coulours. When the weather is bad (like here), it is always photos in black or white. For me, a photo in coulour with a bad weather is ugly. A photo with a bad weather but in black or white is like an archive image. (if someone wish the explanation, more precise, in French...). JÄNNICK Jérémy (talk) 10:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --JLPC (talk) 09:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:28, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hirundo rustica PP.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2012 at 20:24:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Cephas - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, I find the lighting too harsh, and the branch running from the top center to the bottom right is distracting. Also could be sharper. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 23:38, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:12-03-17-aktstudien-nuernberg-by-RalfR-32.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2012 at 20:21:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Low-key lighting, all by Ralf Roleček 20:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ralf Roleček 20:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good illustration of this photographic technique. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 06:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it because the fine details are worked out very well. You should print that out large. Regards  Richard  [®]  06:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good job Poco a poco (talk) 08:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 17:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:29, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ST ○ 19:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:28, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Sangre de Cristo graveyard.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2012 at 23:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too many blown-out parts, plus looks overprocessed. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Strahlenbüschel oder Lichtbüschel 2.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2012 at 06:01:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Strahlenbüschel c/u/n by -- Böhringer (talk) 06:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info This could be my 100th Commons FP. Give your voice on whether - or +. Danke dir, Thank you, merci, dziękuję, grazie, dank u, teşekkür ederim, .....
Support -- Böhringer (talk) 06:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo! -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Für den hundersten Strahlemann  Richard  [®]  06:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--Böhringer (talk) 09:39, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --JLPC (talk) 08:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Immer doch... -- -donald- (talk) 08:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 08:28, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roleček 09:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Einfach Klasse. Altbekanntes Motiv, wunderbar umgesetzt. Ich würde die Kontraste etwas erhöhen aber das ist Geschmackssache.[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:18, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course. Tomer T (talk) 12:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Donnerwetter, jetzt stehst Du in neuem Licht. Ich freue mich mit Dir. Herzlichen Glückwunsch! Danke für Dein Engagement für FP. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 12:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kadellar (talk) 13:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interesting; but I don't know why my eyes prefer this. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 15:06, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

which is ok for me, everyone looks different --Böhringer (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support No doubt for me. And at least this future 100th FP is not a ¶₡¾₨₯₴ mountain panorama !! (joke). Congratulations !!--Jebulon (talk) 19:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Congrats --Muhammad (talk) 20:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mbz1 is back ;-) I will be that nitpicker... I'd just "fix" the black point and play with curves a little. Misses a bit of contrast (at least on my screen). - Benh (talk) 21:24, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd probably love some S curves thing (or slightly more contrast) --PierreSelim (talk) 11:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 16:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Achird (talk) 18:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a modified version as suggested by Benh and PierreSelim. Yann (talk) 07:31, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena

File:Vrchlabí (Hohenelbe) - church of St. Augustin (view from cemetery).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2012 at 16:52:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 16:52, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 16:52, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice dramatic atmosphere, but the dark shadow at the left ruins it IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:10, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:INF3-126 War Effort In Germany... someone is doing the same job as you - Beat him! edit.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 10:06:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Digitial restoration of a UK World War II propaganda poster from the National Archives (UK) poster collection. Created by Roy Nockolds, restored, uploaded and nominated by Peter Weis (talk) 10:06, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 13:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 16:32, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 10:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mr impossible (talk) 09:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Peilturm Kap Arkona 2012, 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2012 at 17:26:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. -- Felix König ✉ 17:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -- Felix König ✉ 17:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but the composition is imho too tight. --Ivar (talk) 18:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this is almost the same file that failed a few days ago (same date stamp in exif). So I think it is fair to specify what edits you have done prior to the new nomination. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, as I wrote in my description: it is an edited version. The old version was at the top wider than at the bottom and there was a halo around the tower. These problems have been fixed. Additionally, the crop is a bit less tight and the resolution is higher. -- Felix König ✉ 16:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the reply. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:22, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 22:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cucurbita moschata Butternut 2012 G2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2012 at 21:13:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded by George Chernilevsky - nominated by George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite eye-catching. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 22:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Didactic. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 11:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual subject for a FP candidate, very interesting composition. The flower is "the" good detail.--Jebulon (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AlphaEta (talk) 18:07, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:44, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A.Savin 11:33, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Myrabella (talk) 08:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stas1995 (talk) 19:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink

File:Pilea involucrata, Jardín Botánico, Múnich, Alemania 2012-04-21, DD 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2012 at 21:53:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Exemplar of Pilea involucrata, Botanic Garden of Munich, (Germany); all by Poco a poco -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very interesting colors. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 22:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Congratulations. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 05:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support I usually prefer more depth; but I like this. The details on the big leaf right centre is amazing. I can't find many leaves in focus. :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 08:13, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 11:24, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Photographer (talk) 13:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Regards, Peter Weis (talk) 16:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard [®] 19:59, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 20:40, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colin (talk • contribs) -- 20:51, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support to see all these favorable vote I wonder if its leaves can be smoked? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Everything can be smoked, matter of taste, if you don't know, ask a specialist ! Nice variations on the green color, nice and great picture.--Jebulon (talk) 15:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Visit our forests if you need fresh Cannabis indica leaves. :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support – SteveStrummer (talk) 05:29, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting --Stas1995 (talk) 10:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support big wow ! - Benh (talk) 22:31, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:58, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Tulum - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2012 at 09:24:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Kadellar -- Kadellar (talk) 09:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kadellar (talk) 09:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot, I loved that place Poco a poco (talk) 20:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support could be sharper and the buildings less shady, but superb composition, wow to me and nice colours. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 20:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 03:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JDP90 (talk) 06:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition and the colors are really outstanding, though sharpness could have been better maybe. FP anyway.--Jebulon (talk) 23:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really nice photo, The colours of the clouds and the sea look really good, looks a lovely place to.--Danesman1 (talk) 20:22, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Nembrotha kubaryana.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2012 at 13:17:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created & uploaded by Nhobgood - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 13:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 13:17, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support beautiful! Yathin sk (talk) 14:16, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JDP90 (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Colors are great, and as thumb looks amazing but there are noise issues and some blurry areas, Poco a poco (talk) 19:00, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't that in acceptable amount for underwater photography? Tomer T (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment made me reflect on it, and my answer would be: "I am not sure". I don't have much experience with underwater photography and therefore I cannot judge -as maybe others can- were is the acceptable noise threshold, therefore I take back my vote for now. Poco a poco (talk) 07:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 17:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]