Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates:
Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal things[edit]Nominating[edit]Guidelines for nominators[edit]Please read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable. Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself. Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well. Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced." Photographs[edit]On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audio[edit]Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominations[edit]If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Simple tutorial for new users[edit]Adding a new nomination[edit]If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following. Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button. All single files: For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2
All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".
Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:
Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters. Voting[edit]Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose. Featured picture candidate policy[edit]General rules[edit]
Featuring and delisting rules[edit]A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations. The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be polite[edit]Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care. Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken. See also[edit]
|
Table of contents[edit]
Featured picture candidates[edit]
File:First medical X-ray by Wilhelm Röntgen of his wife Anna Bertha Ludwig's hand - 18951222.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Feb 2024 at 22:43:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1850-1899
- Info created by Wilhelm Röntgen, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann
- Support First X-ray picture, high resolution, restored. -- Yann (talk) 22:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive capture and restoration! ★ 22:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Alley in Colatina (3).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Feb 2024 at 19:56:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Brazil
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think I got a better shot here… -- ★ 19:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Saint Mary of the Assumption Parish (Springboro, Ohio) - stained-glass, Adoration by the Shepherds detail 2.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Feb 2024 at 17:37:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows
- Info created by Nheyob - uploaded by Nheyob - nominated by Nheyob -- Nheyob (talk) 17:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. -- Nheyob (talk) 17:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:African Safari in Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Safari Park.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Feb 2024 at 16:38:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
- Info created by Azim Khan Ronnie - uploaded by Azim Khan Ronnie - nominated by Moheen -- ~Moheen (keep talking) 16:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ~Moheen (keep talking) 16:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not an African safari, where drones would rightly be banned. And if it was, this would not be the best point of view to show off the animals. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- This photo was taken at Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Safari Park, Bangladesh, not in Africa. ~Moheen (keep talking) 06:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Ravi Varma-Lady playing the swarbat.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Feb 2024 at 12:25:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People
- Info created by Raja Ravi Varma - uploaded by Yann - nominated by Moheen -- ~Moheen (keep talking) 12:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ~Moheen (keep talking) 12:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 13:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 13:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:At Dunham Massey 2024 014 - Snowdrops.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2024 at 23:30:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Amaryllidaceae
- Info created by Mike Peel - uploaded by Mike Peel - nominated by Mike Peel -- Mike Peel (talk) 23:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mike Peel (talk) 23:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wow! ★ 00:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Technical quality so-so. Artefacts around many flowers. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Charlesjsharp: Thanks for looking, could you be more specific about the artefacts you're seeing please? Am happy to upload a new version if I can see and fix them. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The background is too busy for my taste and the lighting nothing special. Sorry.--Ermell (talk) 09:46, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Cluttered background is distracting in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Sweet Bread Mountain.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2024 at 20:07:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Sun
- Info Sunset in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Sugarloaf Mountain is visible in the left background. The peak is situated at the mouth of Guanabara Bay on a peninsula that juts out into the Atlantic Ocean. Rising 396 m (1,299 ft) above the harbor, and is named for its resemblance to the traditional shape of concentrated refined loaf sugar. It is known worldwide for its cableway and panoramic views of the city and beyond. Created and uploaded by Donatas Dabravolskas - nominated by ★ -- ★ 20:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's not just another sunset… -- ★ 20:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support IMHO quite oversaturated, but still excellent Cmao20 (talk) 20:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 21:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. A magic moment. --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yes, much processed; but effective. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 19:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Blacks are very strong, and the saturation of the foreground a bit excessive. Still the composition and special weather induce a significant wow factor -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 05:32, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:The Martyrdom of Saint Dorothea by Josse van der Baren St Peter collegiate church in Leuven (1).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2024 at 14:27:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Religion#Christianity
- Info all by Tournasol7. I'm not sure about FP gallery. If you find a more appropriate category, please correct it :) -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Changed to a category where it matches well with the existing FPs. Cmao20 (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 14:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Really interesting artwork, elegantly presented in its context as displayed. Cmao20 (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The pictures on the side would be better taken at right angles to each painting and three images presented as a set. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Having another look, I don't think this does the artworks any favours. The doors aren't even fully open and are not open the same amount. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 21:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 08:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nicely captured triptych. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is a faithful representation of the view we have when facing the whole -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 05:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Domplatz 9 in Merseburg (1).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2024 at 14:16:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors/Germany#Saxony-Anhalt
- Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 14:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Hmm, I hate to say it but I think this falls into the 'good QI' category for me. The subject is really interesting but the light is not the best and it's not your sharpest. Cmao20 (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Statues on the gable of Linderhof Palace[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2024 at 13:36:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
"Agriculture" and "Trade"
-
"Atlas"
-
"Science" and "Industry"
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues outdoors
- Info The gable of the middle section of the South facade of Linderhof Palace is crowned of Atlas as a central figure. On the left side of the gable are standing two statues, representing "Agriculture" and "Trade", on the right side the statues "Science" and "Industry". For the whole gable see here; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 13:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose with regret. I was ready to support this because it's really interesting and a correct use of the set nomination mechanism. But the middle image of the Atlas statue is just not sharp. Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not a set. Other statues missing. And the centre image is not to scale. It is larger than the others. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Alternative[edit]
Allegoric statues on the gable of Linderhof Palace[edit]
-
"Agriculture" and "Trade"
-
"Science" and "Industry"
- Info According to the comment of Cmao20 --Llez (talk) 15:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This cannot be a set as there are many more statues on the facade, including the one deleted (which was not to scale). Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment But this are the only allegoric statues (see the title of this alternative set), the others are "normal" angels and putti, and Atlas, a mythological person (see here) --Llez (talk) 18:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support IMHO this works as a set because it shows all four allegorical statues of the façade. Their names form also a (at that time common) summary of the most important kinds of business, so they are complete. @Llez: I have marked three dust spots on the left image (see image notes on the file description page) and would suggest to fix them. --Aristeas (talk) 08:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for the review and the hint --Llez (talk) 13:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! --Aristeas (talk) 14:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for the review and the hint --Llez (talk) 13:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I can't detect WOW anywhere here. Sorry.--Ermell (talk) 09:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Aristeas' supporting statement. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose In both pictures the tiny part of the pillar visible at the left or at the right is ruining the composition. Also bottom-up angle of view is not so appealing. Insufficient wow factor to outweighs these two problems in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Real Monasterio de San Juan de la Peña, Huesca, España, 2023-01-05, DD 66-68 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2024 at 12:57:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Spain
- Info Cloister of the Royal Monastery of San Juan de la Peña, one of the jewels of Romanesque in Spain. It's located near Jaca, in the province of Huesca and is partially carved in the stone of the great cliff that overhangs the foundation (San Juan de la Peña means "Saint John of the Cliff"). The old monastery was built in 920, became part of the Benedictine Order in the 11th century and was the first monastery in Spain to use the Latin Mass. The cloister, built ca. 1190, contains a series of capitals with Biblical scenes. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wow, so impressive to see it with that massive cliff overhanging it Cmao20 (talk) 14:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support It is as if the rock is slowly consuming the building. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Gives an impressive impression of that famous and very special cloister. --Aristeas (talk) 20:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 21:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 04:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per the supporters above. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 09:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 05:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Little pied cormorant (Microcarbo melanoleucos) Freycinet.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 20:37:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phalacrocoracidae (Cormorants)
- Info Two FPs of this species, both are good but this one is better in terms of resolution and detail. Created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Appealing not only because of the subject but also because of the matching color combination of light blue bokeh, the pastel turquoise anchor pillar and the white and grey plumage with the yellow spot of the beak. Very good! -- Radomianin (talk) 21:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, couldn't have put it better myself, that's exactly why the composition here is so appealing Cmao20 (talk) 14:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 12:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Killarnee (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Lighting is a bit dull but composition and pose of the bird are overcoming it. --Laitche (talk) 16:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 20:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Meiræ 20:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 05:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Algal mat in Marine Park (90933).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 19:37:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Other_lifeforms
- Info An algal mat. Came across a bunch of algal mats a couple years ago and thought they were very pretty. As far as I understand, this is primarily cyanobacteria, and hence not classified as algae (confusingly, these structures are still called algal mats, and cyanobacteria is commonly called algae). Could use help with the gallery categorization. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 19:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 19:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Fascinating because of the fine and coarse details of the structures. I think the slightly fuzzy elements in the lower right do not detract from the overall impression. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin Cmao20 (talk) 12:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Killarnee (talk) 16:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 20:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Mantis ootheca in Marine Park (91115).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 19:30:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Mantidae_(Mantids)
- Info A Chinese mantis (Tenodera sinensis) hatched out ootheca (the egg mass structure). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 19:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 19:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Simple but attractive, good light and background. --Aristeas (talk) 07:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:MAERSK HANOI Container Ship (Port Koper SIKOP, 2023).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 15:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Ships
- Info Maersk Hanoi container ship at Koper Port. My shot. -- Mile (talk) 15:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mile (talk) 15:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 19:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Uneven composition. Too uneven to consider this one of this site's finest pictures. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking colours and composition Cmao20 (talk) 12:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The containers at the back of the ship fall off at the next major well. On one container in the middle you can only see Maers without the K. Was that retouched out?--Ermell (talk) 09:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Ermell All is original. Its a drone shot. Doing PD here wont bring any good. I have tried. --Mile (talk) 17:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Alley in Colatina.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 12:29:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Brazil
- Info Alley in Colatina, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 12:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support As per Cmao20's recommendation. Pinging the previous voters: Thi, Cmao20 and Draceane. -- ★ 12:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral per my comments on the withdrawn set, it is the best original image you have submitted to FPC and I'm almost tempted to support as a vote of confidence, but given that it isn't centred and the image quality is not that good, I can't in good conscience call it one of the finest images on Commons even though I really like the motif and think it's a good photograph Cmao20 (talk) 12:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Cmao20: I understand and appreciate your comments; about the centralization: I don't know if you can see, but, from this point of view, the alley is slightly (almost imperceptibly) oriented to the left, so I tried my best to find some symmetry. ★ 12:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Alternative[edit]
- Info I took this shot yesterday; better light, better centralized, square crop and RAW mode activated. Pinging Thi, Cmao20 Draceane and Tournasol7 to see my new work. ★ 11:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This is indeed a much better composition, but the contrast is very strong. Yann (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
@Yann: Contrast improved. ★ 17:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)- @Yann: I just took another picture a few minutes ago because the light conditions were better. ★ 18:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Nominating the alternative as a separate candidate. ★ 19:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Félicien Rops - Pornokratès - 1878FXD.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 11:45:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Myth,_legends_and_proverbs
- Info Félicien Rops, Pornocrates, 1878. Example of decadent movement and symbolism in art. - uploaded by Pixel8tor - nominated by Thi -- Thi (talk) 11:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Thi (talk) 11:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 12:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Are those shadowy borders part of the original painting (e.g. the area next to the frame) or are they an artefact of this particular digitisation? Cmao20 (talk) 12:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- It is a part of the original. A picture of the framed painting is here. --Thi (talk) 12:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support then Cmao20 (talk) 13:18, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- It is a part of the original. A picture of the framed painting is here. --Thi (talk) 12:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not sharp enough for an easy to take shot. Look at the putti f. ex. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The compression is too excessive for my taste, and the tip of the nose of the pig is too near to the image/painting border --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:019 Stacked images of an European Bee-eater in flight Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 08:42:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Meropidae (Bee-eaters)
- Info Image created by stacking three photographs of an European bee-eater (Merops apiaster) in flight at Pfyn-Finges, Switzerland. Created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great compilation, similar to a motion study. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 11:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 12:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good but if I were to say a flaw, the space between the first and second birds is a lot narrower than the space between the second and third. Is there perhaps something you could do to work on that? No big deal if not Cmao20 (talk) 12:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. It is three pictures of the same bird during the same continuous flight. Each representation of this bird is placed exactly where the bird was placed at that moment so I can't move it. Giles Laurent (talk) 12:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Very impressive photo, anyway Cmao20 (talk) 13:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful! ~Moheen (keep talking) 15:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support good capture --Mile (talk) 15:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 19:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adorable image, but the stated categorie "Montages by type" should be fixed --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. A staff member from the Wiki Science Competition added this category to the file so I don't know if I can edit it. Also, none of the subcategories look appropriate, maybe there exists a better one, what category do you suggest ? Giles Laurent (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- One cat could be Category:Triptych photographs, but it may be not accurate enough :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the suggestion but it is not a triptych as well. Cart found and added the perfect category that perfectly describes the image: "Chronophotography". Thank you Cart for finding it! Giles Laurent (talk) 12:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- One cat could be Category:Triptych photographs, but it may be not accurate enough :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. A staff member from the Wiki Science Competition added this category to the file so I don't know if I can edit it. Also, none of the subcategories look appropriate, maybe there exists a better one, what category do you suggest ? Giles Laurent (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 17:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very beautiful and educative. --Aristeas (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 09:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Bloem van Anemone 'Honorine Jobert'. 29-08-2023. (actm.) 02.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 05:28:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Ranunculaceae
- Info Flower of Anemone 'Honorine Jobert'. Focus stack of 80 photos.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 11:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Simple, crisp and beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 12:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 19:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:54, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Background lets this down. Shadows etc. generated during the stacking. More care needed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose not done. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Phayao - Small rowing boat moored on shores of Phayao Lake Jan 2024.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2024 at 03:09:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Boats
- Info A small wooden boat on the shores of Phayao Lake on northern Thailand. I like the contrast between the small vessel and the wide open lake, and the depth added to the photo by the hazy mountains in the distance (it is the start of the burning season in the region, so this is genuine haze, not noise). Created, uploaded and nominated by BigDom -- BigDom (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- BigDom (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for explaining in the nomination why you see it as FP. On reflection, I agree. Cmao20 (talk) 12:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 19:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice!--Famberhorst (talk) 17:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Cartigny - Moulin-de-Vert - Herons.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2024 at 13:50:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland
- Info Foggy morning at Moulin de Vert (Cartigny) nature reserve, Switzerland, October 2009. Created by Didier Baertschiger - uploaded/nominated by Юрий Д.К 13:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 13:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice find. Magical light and very good composition Cmao20 (talk) 17:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It's a beautiful composition, but the red channel is clipped way too much. — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Draceane is right about the red channel – it’s a pity. However it still works astonishingly well, most details are present and the autumnal atmosphere is great. --Aristeas (talk) 20:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The quality is just not there. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Cuba - Cayo Coco.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2024 at 14:14:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Cuba
- Info Morning seascape at Cayo Coco beach, Cuba. Created by Didier Baertschiger - uploaded/nominated by Юрий Д.К 14:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 14:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support WOW. Great colors. --Laitche (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per Laitche. ★ 14:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Not that sharp, but such a minimalistic composition that there's not a lot that needs to be sharp anyway Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 21:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 03:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Pleasure in pastels! -- Radomianin (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 23:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20 and Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 14:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking pastel shades and nice color gradients --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:08, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- -donald- (talk) 11:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Mountains clouds Mekong and dwellings from Mount Phou Si at sunrise in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2024 at 10:36:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Laos
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 11:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 14:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 14:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Another one that could be a painting Cmao20 (talk) 17:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's an inviting mood. For a northern European in winter, it awakens wanderlust. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice subdued colours, very atmospheric. --Aristeas (talk) 14:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:06, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:026b Humpback whale jump and splash Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2024 at 10:36:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Balaenopteridae (Rorquals)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 11:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 11:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 11:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 14:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 17:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive! -- Radomianin (talk) 10:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 13:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support A shame for the cut off tail, but considering the difficulty, the capture has a wow factor, and the level of detail is generous -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ~Moheen (keep talking) 16:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Sandbanks sunset.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Feb 2024 at 07:18:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Ontario
- Info: Nicholson Island and Huycks Point distorted by Fata Morgana; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 10:23, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 14:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but having looked at this one a few times I just don't find the composition very satisfying. I think the Sun is placed too far to the right of the frame. I see what you were thinking and I'm sure it looked stunning but...all sunsets are pretty Cmao20 (talk) 17:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Just a sunset. Sorry--Ermell (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: while it adds to the ambience, sunset is not the point here. I feel this is a good depiction of Fata Morgana, which is something we don't have a lot of. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:59, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support The Fata Morgana is impressing, but the burnt-out sun doesn't help a lot... — Draceane talkcontrib. 13:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ermell. ~Moheen (keep talking) 15:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral per Draceane. --Aristeas (talk) 14:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The clipped whites are too prominent for my taste, sorry. HDRI could give the scene more depth. There is also a dust spot under the sun --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination: thank you for the comments. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Mountains in snow, Mountain lake, Chola Valley, Nepal, Himalayas.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2024 at 21:54:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Nepal
- Info Mountaineers descending into Chola Valley, 5,200 metres (17,100 ft) a. s. l., in good weather conditions, with a panoramic view over snow-capped Himalayan peaks to the south of the Great Himalayan Range in Mahalangur Himal, Nepal, Himalayas. All by -- Argenberg (talk) 21:54, 27 January 2024 (UTC).
- Support -- Argenberg (talk) 21:54, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 22:35, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 22:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 00:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 02:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 14:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive Cmao20 (talk) 16:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support good, but you dont need f/11, its not FF. Would be beter on 8 or 9. --Mile (talk) 15:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Seagull-croatia.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2024 at 18:26:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus_:_Larus
- Info created by Galessandroni - uploaded by Galessandroni - nominated by Galessandroni -- Giacomo Alessandroni What's up! 18:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Great composition but blue chromatic aberration visible and overall I don't think the level of detail is sufficient for an FP of a common bird. Cmao20 (talk) 16:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Monumento Natural dos Lagosteiros.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2024 at 15:03:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Portugal
- Info: golden hour at the Lagosteiros Natural Monument; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 02:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 11:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 16:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great contrast between the structured cliffs and the sea spray. The slight complementary color combination is also pleasing to the eye. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition with diagonal lines. --Aristeas (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Rightly has a lot of support, but too much foreground for me. It detracts from the water and cliffs which seem to be the main subject (see note). Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Paul Nadar, "Autoportrait au bureau de l'atelier, rue d'Anjou".jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2024 at 14:36:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1890-1899
- Info created by Paul Nadar - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 11:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Interesting early photographic self-portrait.--Aristeas (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:В. Васнецов. Сирин и Алконост.png[edit]
Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2024 at 08:23:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others
- Info created by Viktor Vasnetsov - uploaded by Юлия 70 - nominated by Kelly The Angel -- 💚Kelly The Angel (Talk to me)💚 08:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- 💚Kelly The Angel (Talk to me)💚 08:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Fascinating artwork but sorry, it's just too small and noisy for a painting digitisation in 2024 Cmao20 (talk) 15:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Common wombat (Vombatus ursinus tasmaniensis) juvenile Maria Island.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2024 at 10:52:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Vombatidae (Wombats)
- Info At around 7 months, the joey first starts to explore but doesn't leave its mother's side. No wombat FPs. Unusual to observe this in the wild. A ranger was close by, offering protection. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:06, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 13:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Part of the animal is not sharp. The left ear is particularly worrying.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Animal moving so no focus stack. Camera settings are a good compromise. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support I was first surprised but then found out it's on Maria Island (a wombat-haven). Still a great take, though! --SHB2000 (talk) 09:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good composition and close-up detail for a difficult animal to capture, all outweighs the points Famberhorst raises for me. Cmao20 (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:48, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Red clouds over Mekong banks with dwellings and pirogues at sunrise in Don Det Laos.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2024 at 01:45:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Clouds
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Striking sky, but something about the post-processing on the foreground especially isn't working for me -- I think it's a result of raising the shadows too much in some areas? Curious to see if others get the same sense. — Rhododendrites talk | 03:21, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes it is HDR photography taken from 3 images in bracketing mode at different exposures +/-2EV. The shadows of the foreground have been lifted to reveal more details. It is intentional to avoid black silhouettes (due to contrejour and high contrast), and also to highlight the content I find interesting, in addition to the clouds. Thanks for your comment -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment A little under-saturated and needs shadow-adjustment like this, imho --Laitche (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Info Thanks everyone for the feedbacks and suggestions. There are different tastes in this group. It seems that Rhododendrites likes the shadows reduced and Laitche on the contrary lifted, with the exposure slightly decreased. Still no major difference in the saturation of the colors in my view. But the current version is a faithful representation of the sky that morning, and I don't want to create a fiction. The intensity of exposure is arguable, but more a matter of taste in my opinion. Thus I keep the current settings. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- If this saturarion was a faithful representation, I prefer the the first version. When reverted to the first version, I would support. --Laitche (talk) 02:08, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Laitche. Thank you very much for your input -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Support Very nice mood. --Laitche (talk) 02:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking colours and compostion. --Tagooty (talk) 13:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 02:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The colours are striking but it looks far too overprocessed for me to consider this as one of this site's finest pictures. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Such scenes with their high contrast and the bright colours of the sunrise/sunset sky are often tricky and their processing is a matter of taste. After looking a while at this photo I think Basile has found a good balance and the image gives a vivid impression of a great sunrise sky. --Aristeas (talk) 11:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 11:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Hard to capture the same dynamic range as the human eye in a photo like this where the foreground will tend to silhouette. Personally I think Basile has done a good job of that. Cmao20 (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 22:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 08:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per SHB. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think you're setting the saturation on your monitor a little too much.One of my multiple monitors has high saturation, and the saturation of this photo is just right on that monitor. --Laitche (talk) 00:45, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
File:Jan ten Kate.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2024 at 00:41:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1920-1929
- Info Anonymous photographer - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice portrait, excellent restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 11:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 08:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 13:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:20230917 2 Burg Kriebstein.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2024 at 17:35:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications/Germany#Saxony
- Info IMO beautiful light and no FPs of this castle. created by Code - uploaded by Code - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Alu (talk) 22:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Light and view point, but the left part with the blurry branch in the foreground could be cropped out in my opinion (note added) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Per Basile Morin. It's okay to have blurred objects in front of the main subject if they have some meaning, but in this case the blurred branches have no meaning and are just a nuisance. --Laitche (talk) 08:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC) These blurred branches are different from this case. --Laitche (talk) 02:34, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 10:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The tree in the foreground is unfortunate. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice harvest, but perhaps Basile's proposed cut is more beautiful.<.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not exceptional in clarity or composition. Better FPs of castles in the galleries. --Tagooty (talk) 13:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support: agree with the crop suggestion --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 02:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great view (thank you, Cmao20, for the nomination). The proposed crop has its pro and contra. --Aristeas (talk) 11:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Ratargul 785 retouched.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2024 at 15:58:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work
- Info I hope, that I fixed the biggest problems of the original photo. Let's see, how it goes. First nomination can be found here. Created by Abdulmominbd – uploaded & nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Outstanding composition and colours outweigh mediocre image quality Cmao20 (talk) 17:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral I am very undecided. The composition is wonderful, but the person is out of focus. --XRay 💬 10:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support For the composition. ★ 13:11, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support I’m glad you have found a way to reduce the pixelation at the face etc. which was (besides the strong CAs) the main problem of the original photo. --Aristeas (talk) 16:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per Cmao20 --Kritzolina (talk) 16:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 02:25, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:54, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per XRay. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment A very good composition that I already liked when it was first nominated two years ago. @Iifar and Aristeas: Thank you very much for the time you have already put into editing. I tried to mitigate the last mentioned issue by editing the man's face and hands separately. If you think the edit is an improvement, feel free to use it for an update: Updated version available through SwissTransfer. I just want to help :) Thanks in advance and best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 19:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Portrait of Billie Holiday and Mister, Downbeat, New York, N.Y., ca. Feb. 1947 (LOC, 5020400274, cropped).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2024 at 15:53:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical/People#1940-1949
- Info created by William P. Gottlieb - uploaded by Rrburke, adjusted by Opencooper and Hohum (edit: and Radomianin) - nominated by Thi -- Thi (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Thi (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Love this Cmao20 (talk) 17:38, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Certainly FP worthy, but some more restoration is needed. Yann (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
* Oppose Restoration is needed Ezarateesteban 23:02, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment What additional restoration is required? As far as blemishes go - I think the marks in the background are actual marks on the wall. Hohum (talk) 01:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support When I compare the retouched version with the source file, I realize that the retouching was done very well. To me, this version is clearly worthy of support. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Addendum: @Cmao20, Yann, Ezarate, and Charlesjsharp: I have just prepared a re-retouched version, provided via SwissTransfer, in which I have removed various scratches and lint in the following parts: Neck, headdress, chin, wall, dress, sleeves as well as the dog's muzzle, chest and paw. @Hohum: Please take a look at the edit, if you think this is an improvement, feel free to upload it. Apologies for the ping, but if it's for the sake of improvement, it's certainly appropriate. Thanks in advance and best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 13:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Various specks etc. needing better restoration. Also, the source file is very poor, being an offset photo of an original print. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination. Thanks for the discussion. --Thi (talk) 13:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Thi: Ask for Adam Cuerden. ★ 13:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Question @Thi: Perhaps wait with the withdrawal, I just created an improved version and asked the reviewers for their opinion. Thanks in advance and best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 13:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Looking into this. Yann (talk) 19:11, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support I uploaded Radomianin's version. Really good restoration. Yann (talk) 19:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 00:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great portrait. Thank you, Thi, for the nomination, and you, Radomianin for the restoration work – much appreciated! --Aristeas (talk) 10:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support now yes, thanks!! Ezarateesteban 13:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Basílica de San Sernín, Toulouse, Francia, 2023-01-06, DD 102-104 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2024 at 12:41:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#France
- Info Basilica of Saint Sermin, Toulouse, France. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Exquisite. Beautiful light + you can even read the text on the signs. See image note, I found an HDR artefact that should be removed. Cmao20 (talk) 13:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- I promise, I'll fix that but I'm traveling right now and will not have access to the file until Sunday next week. Poco a poco (talk) 12:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Epiphany Eve. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 10:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support the picture seems a bit underexposed to me. This picture depict the quite rare displays of the tapesteries. --PierreSelim (talk) 12:47, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I have actually been to this church and the light was pretty dark inside. Personally I would not want to brighten this picture. Cmao20 (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:24, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose when I saw the picture tilted, off centered, waay too dark, yet with raving supports, I knew it was a Poco. Not sure why the bias. - Benh (talk) 09:58, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think I am being biased. I have opposed plenty of Poco's nominations in the past including one this month. I think this is pretty harsh though, being really honest (nothing personal, I love your work!). Some churches just are quite dark and at 5:49pm in winter, this is very likely to be pretty accurate to the actual lighting. And as for off centre, the church itself is clearly 'off centre' in that the centre aisle does not line up with the altar. Maybe that precludes the photo from FP for you, but it is not the fault of the photographer. In an asymmetric building one has to choose something to be centred at the cost of other things, I guess. Cmao20 (talk) 13:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Flower of Narcissus tazetta at Nagai Park, January 2024 - 1393.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2024 at 19:40:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae
- Info Flower of Narcissus tazetta at Nagai Park. c/u/n by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Laitche (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice capture, a good example that it doesn't always have to be stacking shots. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 12:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Would need to be special for such a common type of flower. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral - sharp, but it seems like it's missing highlights, perhaps because of bright light? — Rhododendrites talk | 03:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Rhododendrites: Your assuming is bingo! When raise the highlight, the white is blown out. --Laitche (talk) 04:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC) But it seems fixable. --Laitche (talk) 04:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed --Laitche (talk) 04:24, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:53, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral It is not bad, but not so wow like file:Narzisse.jpg for example. The second flower is not in focus, and the other flowers at the bottom are disturbing. And the background is somehow not matching. -- -donald- (talk) 07:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 02:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Light and bokeh -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Jorge Amado, gtfy.00010.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2024 at 15:12:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
- Info created by Bernard Gotfryd, uploaded and nominated by Yann
- Support One of the most famous Brazilian authors. -- Yann (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice find! --RodRabelo7 (talk) 15:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good authentic portrait of a great author. --Kritzolina (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Brazil on top! 🇧🇷 ★ 18:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Notable person and good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose Good photo, but I think the specks of dirt all over the top part of the photo (over his head) should be eliminated in a digital restoration for this to be featured.-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: I cleaned it a bit more. Thanks for looking. Yann (talk) 21:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Much better, thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Korenveld met kraaien - s0149V1962 - Van Gogh Museum.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2024 at 14:17:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscapes
- Info created by Vincent van Gogh - uploaded by Wojtu - nominated by Moheen -- ~Moheen (keep talking) 14:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ~Moheen (keep talking) 14:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 18:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 22:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
OversaturatedYes, that’s art ;–). Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Van Gogh's brush strokes cannot be expressed in 2D, but this is still worthy of FP. --Laitche (talk) 12:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Garish colors. Oversaturated, yes. Not Van Gogh's usual palette, sorry. Compare with the version in Van Gogh Museum, and newspapers like Le Temps, The Conversation, Times of Malta, Le Figaro, France Info, Telerama, Vogue, Le Point, La Voix du Nord... -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:08, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I wonder which parts are oversaturated compare with this one or this one??? --Laitche (talk) 04:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Clearly different colors when the 2 images are superimposed for comparison. The original blue is not an electric blue but a much warmer tint, kind of Persian blue / Persian indigo. It has an impact on the mood. Quality of the file is good, but I think the colors have been modified too much from the original version.
- Moreover, when increasing the exposure on Photoshop, the colors remain accurate. I don't know which process has been made here, but temperature and saturation seem wrong.
- The original version (archived) from the Van Gogh Museum is here. Although dark, it is very likely that the light calibration is relevant, and the difference is huge. I don't find good to overwrite the original picture by an arbitrary version, so different. At the very least it should have been done under a different file name.
- The original picture is not a RAW but a JPG. It means that if you alter the luminosity, you are modifying fixed colors (not flexible). The more important the change is, the more damaged are the nuances of the palette. Non-artistic files, like graphics or tables, can be improved that way, but hardly art pieces, where subtle colors are essential and skillfully designed by sensible artists -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it's definitely different, but isn't it more like brightened than oversaturation, in my eyes :-) --Laitche (talk) 07:47, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Brightening, lightening, or whatever tool was applied here, has resulted in oversaturated colors because the JPG colors were pushed excessively. To verify, you can try this simple test on your computer: take a RAW photograph, then convert it in JPG. Afterwards, increase the light of both images, the RAW and the JPG separately, then you'll notice a significant difference in the saturation of the colors. The RAW will seem plausible, while the JPG will appear unnatural -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, I got it! :) --Laitche (talk) 09:00, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
-
- Thank you, Basile Morin, for the explanations and the instructive example! This shows the much higher potential of raw files. And there are even more benefits of shooting raw over shooting JPEG. Hence the common advise “Shoot raw” … --Aristeas (talk) 11:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Another painting also made by Van Gogh, was uploaded the same day from the same official website. The exposure is okay, suggesting that there might be a valid reason to present this version of the painting, rather than a bright one. Very possibly the original artwork is composed of dark colors on the canvas. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Added retouched template -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Flowers of Prunus mume (Armenaca mume) at Nagai Park, January 2024 - 1221.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2024 at 12:14:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family : Rosaceae
- Info Flowers of Prunus mume (Armenaca mume) at Nagai Park. c/n/u by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 12:14, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Laitche (talk) 12:14, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Kudos for challenging our visual habits! I fear we (the FPC regulars) will call this photo boring and the plant vulgar, talk about a strange crop and too much empty space, etc. But “all beauty of this world is in a single twig with plum flowers” (apocryphal but appropriate ;–), and yes, this photo shows it. --Aristeas (talk) 11:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not well balanced and with the critic of Aristeas.--Ermell (talk) 15:28, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Ermell: Nominated the alternative. What about that? --Laitche (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support per my remarks below. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Alternative[edit]
- Info Crop change. --Laitche (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 15:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support for the alternative. This version is much more harmonious, balanced and interesting. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:28, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:43, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 02:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 11:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support This sufficiently improves the composition that I feel moved to support Cmao20 (talk) 17:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Not obviously an FP at first, but really good to look at, and I think it's deserving and in the tradition of great Japanese prints and paintings. The other version is also an FP to me, but this is probably the better version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ~Moheen (keep talking) 12:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Black kite (Milvus migrans affinis) in flight Adelaide River 2.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2024 at 15:05:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Milvus
- Info Two FPs. One recent FP of a bird in flight. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking expression and good composition. Personally would maybe tone down the sharpening just a bit Cmao20 (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 16:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The eyes seem to have lost all detail from underexposure. Same for the dark area near the claws. Can you recover the data from the raw file ? --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done Eyeshadow lifted and less processing (press cmd+R on mac or ctrl+F5 on windows with image open to force refresh). Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, it is better (the two previous "black holes" looked like some halloween creature), Support ; but eyes are still a bit dark compared to the others shadows areas of the picture, I would brighten the shadows of the eyes just a tiny bit more if the raw file allows. Giles Laurent (talk) 08:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done Eyeshadow lifted and less processing (press cmd+R on mac or ctrl+F5 on windows with image open to force refresh). Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:29, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Comment There a dark halo around the bird, visible at thumbnail size. As if the sky had been locally lightened -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting. I thought I saw what you say, but checking with Photoshop's color picker, I can't find any shadow. The sky has not been locally lightened. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:44, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Could it be a matter of local treatment, like brush associated with highlights and /or shadows? When I pick up the colors locally to compare different locations, it appears that this zone of the sky around the bird (especially above) is slightly darker than elsewhere. By the way, color space is reported "uncalibrated" -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- sRGB assigned. Sky higher up is usually a bit darker. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC) Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Very good, but there is what looks like a little shadow next to the feathers that hang pretty much straight down in the center of the picture below the bird's head. Please discuss that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- I can't find a shadow Ikan Kekek but have touched up the usual 'halo' around the hanging feather slightly in a new version. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Very good, but there is what looks like a little shadow next to the feathers that hang pretty much straight down in the center of the picture below the bird's head. Please discuss that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- sRGB assigned. Sky higher up is usually a bit darker. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC) Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Could it be a matter of local treatment, like brush associated with highlights and /or shadows? When I pick up the colors locally to compare different locations, it appears that this zone of the sky around the bird (especially above) is slightly darker than elsewhere. By the way, color space is reported "uncalibrated" -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting. I thought I saw what you say, but checking with Photoshop's color picker, I can't find any shadow. The sky has not been locally lightened. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:44, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 22:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good quality and proper detail level --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
File:Die Wertschaft am Abend 20231230 HOF04314-HDR RAW-Export.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2024 at 15:03:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
- Info View of the restaurant at lake Untreu during blue hour, created by PantheraLeo1359531 - uploaded by PantheraLeo1359531 - nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support I don't know how much interest there will be in this, maybe because the motif is not naturally very wow-y. But having lived with it for a while I really like it. The composition is satisfying and the light is warm and inviting, and I love the Christmassy vibe. Cmao20 (talk) 23:27, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Agree with Cmao20. For me the contrast of the inviting warm light on the hut with the blue hour surroundings makes this photo very atmospheric (not to mention the Christmas tree ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 11:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Юрий Д.К 13:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Lovely
goldenblue hour shot! --SHB2000 (talk) 11:41, 25 January 2024 (UTC) - Oppose Very well-done, no complaints, but just not a wowing subject or composition to me. Good QI to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support for the beautiful HDR. --Laitche (talk) 11:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 12:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per Laitche. ★ 19:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support Per Laitche. --Harlock81 (talk) 23:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]
Sat 27 Jan → Thu 01 Feb Sun 28 Jan → Fri 02 Feb Mon 29 Jan → Sat 03 Feb Tue 30 Jan → Sun 04 Feb Wed 31 Jan → Mon 05 Feb Thu 01 Feb → Tue 06 Feb
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]
Tue 23 Jan → Thu 01 Feb Wed 24 Jan → Fri 02 Feb Thu 25 Jan → Sat 03 Feb Fri 26 Jan → Sun 04 Feb Sat 27 Jan → Mon 05 Feb Sun 28 Jan → Tue 06 Feb Mon 29 Jan → Wed 07 Feb Tue 30 Jan → Thu 08 Feb Wed 31 Jan → Fri 09 Feb Thu 01 Feb → Sat 10 Feb
Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]
The bot[edit]
Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.
Manual procedure[edit]
Any experienced user may close requests.
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
featured or not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured === - Save your edit.
- If it is featured:
- Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
- Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
- Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
- If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
- If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
- Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
- The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
- You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
- Add == FP promotion ==
{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
- As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/February 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request[edit]
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
'''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg) - Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
delisted or not delisted
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted === - Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/February 2024.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination[edit]
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured === - Save your edit.
- Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/February 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.