Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 05 2019

Consensual review

edit

File:Annona_squamosa_(_Annonaceae_).jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination sugar apple--Filo gèn' 05:01, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. --Manfred Kuzel 05:10, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. Details missing and low resolution for this kind of photograph. --XRay 05:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per XRay. Typical of a mobile phone shot.--Peulle 09:00, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per XRay. Blurring noise reduction combined with oversharpening. -- Smial 10:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 13:59, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

File:GIMS_2019,_Le_Grand-Saconnex_(GIMS0699).jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination New Stratos at Geneva International Motor Show 2019, Le Grand-Saconnex --MB-one 07:21, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
      Support Some noise but ok for a indoor photo, sharp good resolution and quality otherwise --ArildV 07:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose noisy and insufficient dof --Cvmontuy 03:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Cvmontuy. And distracting background (cut person). --Smial 10:49, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 13:58, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

File:Großglockner_Hochalpenstraße_21082018_419.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination View of mountain with glacier, in the lower half a street can be seen. --PantheraLeo1359531 13:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Somewhat soft probably due to weather conditions, but acceptable. --Smial 12:52, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too hazy and overall not QI. --GRDN711 02:31, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per GRND711 an I miss a more informative description --Milseburg 09:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 13:57, 4 August 2019 (UTC))

File:Großglockner_Hochalpenstraße_21082018_433.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Mountain terrain with cloud shadows on the left. --PantheraLeo1359531 13:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
      Support Good quality. --C messier 11:45, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   OpposeI disagree. Too unsharp at the right side IMO. --Ermell 07:57, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ermell --Milseburg 09:40, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 13:57, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

File:2018_09_22_Bioramaturm_DJI_0210.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Biorama-Projekt - Aussichtsturm und weiße Villa in Joachimsthal (Barnim). By User:Daniela Kloth --Ralf Roletschek 20:55, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. --СССР 00:10, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose IMHO too grainy. Also it's tilted --Podzemnik 02:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality for me. --Manfred Kuzel 07:19, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose In theory, the 1-inch CMOS sensor (3:2 ratio with 5472 x 3648-pixel image) on this DJI FC2103 Mavic Pro drone should be able to produce a good image even when cropped to 3999 × 2995 pixels. However, the grain and barrel distortion of the image are troublesome. --GRDN711 22:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose too grainy --Milseburg 09:51, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Seven Pandas 13:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)