Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list

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

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:UBTZ 2TE116UM Tynh - Narst.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2024 at 08:48:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Train in Mongolia

File:Rear NW Basilica Francesco Assisi Sep23 A7C 07913.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2024 at 05:44:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basilica of San Francesco (Assisi), view of side/rear from NW

File:Bloemknop van een blauwe knoop (Succisa pratensis). 29-08-2023. (d.j.b).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2024 at 05:33:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Florence from the Duomo terrace (61408p).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 22:36:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southeastern Florence from the Duomo terrace (panorama)

File:Hell Gate Bridge (60275p).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 22:23:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hell Gate Bridge panorama

File:Hermann Amand Schwarz (1843-1921) by Louis Zipfel.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 20:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hermann Schwarz

File:Catedral, Carcasona, Francia, 2023-01-08, DD 101-103 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 18:30:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Shell-HausBerlinmsu-2023-0I9A-8433-.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 18:29:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Faneca (Trisopterus luscus), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2022-07-29, DD 43.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 16:38:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pouting (Trisopterus luscus), Arrábida National Park, Portugal.
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Class_:_Actinopterygii_(Ray-finned_Fish)
  •  Info Pouting (Trisopterus luscus), Arrábida National Park, Portugal. Poutings belong to the cod family (Gadidae) and are found predominantly in European waters, especially around the south and west of the British Isles and in Scandinavian waters, although they can also be found in the Mediterranean and along the north African coast. It's generally a small fish, seldom exceeding 30 centimetres (12 in) in length. They forage for any food source they can find with marine worms, shellfish and dead fish all making up their diet. It was previously ignored as a commercial fish. However, the decline in the stocks of whitefish species such as cod and haddock has seen pouting acquire a growing value as a commercial fish, and they are now available both as whole fish from fishmongers and supermarkets and are also used in fish products such as fish fingers and ready meals. Note: we have no FPs of the whole order Gadiformes. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 16:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 16:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Could maybe do with being a tiny bit brighter? but excellent composition and image quality Cmao20 (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Écomusée d’Alsace 53.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 09:45:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mulhouse Fortified Tower (Building No. 41), Écomusée d’Alsace, Ungersheim, Haut-Rhin, France.
 Info The only information I got is, that the fortified tower was rebuilt in 1987 from fragments dating from the end of the 15th century. These come from the medieval ramparts of the city of Mulhouse. I added this information also in the file description. --Llez (talk) 12:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:View of Mount Phou Si and Mekong bank at sunset seen from Wat Chomphet in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 01:50:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Mount Phou Si and Mekong bank at sunset seen from Wat Chomphet in Luang Prabang Laos
  • Thanks! Yes, these large boats are mainly intended for the transport of travelers -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pirogue and boat on the Mekong with colorful sky at sunset in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2024 at 01:48:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pirogue and boat on the Mekong with colorful sky at sunset in Luang Prabang Laos

File:Rendering von Seite Sierpiński-Pyramide 20230513 002 RGB16.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2024 at 13:51:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Computer-generated image of a Sierpiński pyramid with a gold like shader

File:Jessie J 12 17 2017 -31 (39161794942).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2024 at 12:50:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:John Everett Millais - The Blind Girl, 1854-56.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2024 at 12:13:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Blind Girl by John Everett Millais.

File:Flock of American wigeons in flight at Llano Seco (2023)-104A0879.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2024 at 04:13:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A flock of American wigeons (Mareca americana) in flight at the Llano Seco Unit of the Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge Complex south of Chico, California
Thanks, Basile. I've literally tried getting a shot like this for years. Then, on Christmas Eve, without any other of the usual photographers at Llano Seco, these wigeons come directly towards me and I start firing… knowing immediately one of my exposures was a money shot. – Look at how funny they are. I'm very thankful to watch this playing out at one of the prime birding spots in California :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC) Reply[reply]
Well done. My favorite is number 2 from the left :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:04, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pez murciélago orbicular (Platax orbicularis), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-19, DD 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2024 at 22:29:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Orbicular batfish (Platax orbicularis), Red Sea, Egypt

File:Alpstein from Schellenberg (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2024 at 10:47:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alpstein seen from Schellenberg, Unterland, Liechtenstein

File:British singer and songwriter Dua Lipa at the SWR3 New Pop Festival 2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2024 at 09:25:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

British singer and songwriter Dua Lipa at the SWR3 New Pop Festival 2016
  • @W.carter and Cmao20: I removed the blob of light near her hand. IMO this was the most disturbing. I hope it is OK. Yann (talk) 19:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Паук Xysticus за завтраком.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2024 at 17:33:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Just like Cmao20 correctly said below. I thought it was obvious that I meant that the subject in the photo is horrifying and creepy. The photo itself is good except for the small things I mentioned. --Cart (talk) 22:33, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you indicate where exactly you saw the stacking errors? Because I can't see anything. Looks like everything has been removed. Shapomacro (talk) 06:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Most of them are right in the middle of the photo, on the back of the beetle. Water drops and ridges on the back shield are double, and there is an unsharp murky area just below the beetle. --Cart (talk) 11:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I think Cart meant the creepiness as a positive. Not all images have to evoke pleasant emotions. This is certainly striking enough to pass. I agree about the stacking errors and worth contacting the nominator about that Shapomacro, your pic is great but would be likelier to pass if those could be improved. Maybe others in the community could help if they could see the original files, I'm afraid I have no experience with focus stacking myself. Cmao20 (talk) 22:24, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Unfortunately, the author of the photo is unlikely to appear on Commons ever again :( JukoFF (talk) 22:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Yes, the stacking is poor but the source images are not sharp enough (1/160 sec - presumably on a tripod). It is oversaturated, possibly because of use of flash. I cxan't work out what's going on with the beetle's legs. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support ★ 11:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Llez (talk) 09:26, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Laitche (talk) 11:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Aerial view of the Cape Mramorny, Sakhalin, Russia DJI 0407-2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2024 at 17:38:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Re. the composition my point is that it's the kind of scene that either cries out for a wider panorama, although that would obviously be tricky, or for a narrower and more focussed crop that gets rid of the parts of the frame with nothing interesting to see - I added a crop suggestion but the issue is that we don't really have the resolution to crop much, so I fear it is a non-starter. Totally agree about the processing unfortunately Cmao20 (talk) 22:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stari železnički most nad Savom, Beograd.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2024 at 09:47:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old Railway bridge over Sava river, Belgrade
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Serbia
  •  Info Old Railway bridge over Sava river, Belgrade. My shot. --Mile (talk) 09:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Mile (talk) 09:47, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support At first I was not sure about some of the crops but thinking about it I'm not sure there's a way to do this any better. Good striking photo and excellent image quality Cmao20 (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support ★ 16:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Good quality, but nothing special about the composition and the bridge itself. Poor and wrong categorization, too. Really a 360°panorama? --A.Savin 16:43, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    A.Savin probably mistake when i put with others which are 360°. Error corrected. --Mile (talk) 17:24, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A.Savin: On quesiton what is special: its nice composition, very good quality, natural colors. Here is your for comparison, its already FP: 1. --Mile (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
COM:OVERCAT, and several relevant categories (such as "Aerial photographs of...") are missing. But that's only a side-note. --A.Savin 18:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(Meanwhile correctly fixed by others.) --A.Savin 16:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:President Barack Obama.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2023 at 15:52:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

And this one much cooler. ;-) --Cart (talk) 13:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --XRay 💬 08:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment I think still isnt up to WH photography. A bit overexposed and Souza could clean those dust spots from cloth. 1,22 MB on 9 MPx - large compresion. ★ i think wont be even near. --Mile (talk) 10:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Why is it overexposed? ★ 10:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Since it look better. +Vibrance, +Contrast, -Brightness --Mile (talk) 17:36, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Well-done official portrait. The traditional aesthetics are typical and appropriate for that genre. Note for geeks: Pete Souza intentionally included the background, i.e. the flags, to clarify the message of the photo. And what did he do to achieve this? He closed the diaphragm to ƒ/7.1 on his 85 mm lens. And the result is fine. What a contrast to the idea advocated by many users in photo forums that you always need the fastest lenses you can get – they say “a ƒ/1.8 85 mm lens is too slow”, “don’t buy brand x, they do not even have a ƒ/1.2 85 mm lens”, etc. ;–) Well, if the background is ugly, it makes sense to throw it out of focus with an extremely fast lens, then ƒ/1.4 or ƒ/1.2 makes sense; but when the background is beautiful and/or important, even a ƒ/2.8 lens is more than fast enough at 85 mm. --Aristeas (talk) 16:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I see no reason to have most official portraits as FPs, but this is a really good one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:15, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support A good photo where he breaks through the fourth wall in a way most official portraits don't do. And it's great if we can get another Souza photo to FP. He is an intuitive photographer with a sense of capturing moments; that doesn't always go down well here at this strange forum called FPC. --Cart (talk) 13:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC) PD: Thanks, Cmao20Reply[reply]

File:Crâne de smilodon exposé au Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2023 at 15:47:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
✓ Done Thanks Cart, please let me know if its the right way to do it --Wilfredor (talk) 18:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, nice try, but that is not the data box I was talking about. Under each image the is a box which (in English) says "Captions" and "Add a one-line explanation of what this file represents". That is the box that should be filled in too on each file. It's just below the image; click on the "Edit " and add the info. --Cart (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ce sont deux créatures différentes Basile! alors, tu te rends compte que le sang d'un Xénomorphe est un acide incroyablement puissant, n'est-ce pas ? Et le smilodon était une créature qui dépendait d'attaques physiques pour tuer ses proies. Même s'il infligeait une blessure mortelle à un Xénomorphe, l'acide le détruirait complètement. De plus, le Xénomorphe est un superorganisme génétiquement modifié, conçu pour être efficace dans le meurtre, et il est dit dans l'univers qu'il est aussi intelligent, sinon plus, que les primates non humains. Le smilodon, en comparaison, n'était qu'un grand félin avec une force de morsure bien moindre et des canines plus longues que la moyenne, qui, pour autant que nous le sachions, n'était pas plus intelligent qu'un tigre moyen. Il n'y a vraiment pas de match. Les Xenos remportent celui-ci, sans conteste. --Wilfredor (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --XRay 💬 08:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Could be, background is helpful here, crop work. --Mile (talk) 09:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment White borderlines caused by cutting in several areas around the skull, very well visible e.g. at the canines --Llez (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This was not cut, the background was the natural background of the Museum. You can see this by looking at this same skeleton behind the giant sloth on the right here. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But where do the bright halos on the canines come from? It should be possible to remove them. --Llez (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Llez I don't know where it comes from, maybe a backlight effect? Anyway, I've already eliminated it. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 17:56, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Support OK now --Llez (talk) 06:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Golden Chapel, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2023 at 15:21:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden Chapel, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
✓ Done --Wilfredor (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Thanks, I don't know how no one here saw that, including me. --Wilfredor (talk) 16:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Underside of expanded bluefire jellyfish in Brofjorden at Sandvik 57.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2023 at 11:35:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Underside of expanded bluefire jellyfish in Brofjorden
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class : Scyphozoa
  •  Info Not a view you usually see in photos of jellyfishes, but this bluefire jelly is showing its pretty frilly "petticoats" in such beautiful way. You can also see three of the four prominent mouth arms well. The fourth arm is ("modestly") folded down over its mouth. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Cart (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support The other one looks more like a jellyfish, this one looks more like an abstract artwork. Both good candidates. Cmao20 (talk) 18:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks! Can't say I "like" them either, they are either yuckky and slimy or they sting like hell when you swim into their threads by mistake. :-/ But they are fun to photograph. --Cart (talk) 19:30, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --XRay 💬 08:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Mile (talk) 09:56, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 15:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:09, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Extremely doubtful quality, biological species is almost impossible to determine, not a jellyfish or a piece of fishing net with foam plastic, in the background you can not see anything at all, this grayness does not allow you to concentrate on the main image. This is a very weak shot. JukoFF (talk) 22:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I urge all those in favor to look at this photo more objectively. JukoFF (talk) 22:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, I'll take your very honest critique to heart, but at least I can assure you that this is indeed a jellyfish. :-) You can even compare it with the photos of half-turned jellies in the category. --Cart (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's nothing personal:) JukoFF (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes in this category, according to the trends of this vote, 2/3 of the photos should be favorites, they at least show something related to jellyfish:) JukoFF (talk) 22:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, this sort of comments always pop up when you try to show a new angle of something, that people in general aren't used to seeing. And you are wrong about the percentage; about 90% of the photos in that category are far below FP quality. But it was a rare event to get this species in camera range, and I wanted to make the most of it, even though the overall light was not good at that time. I only dared to make these nominations because of the FPC rule about hard-to-photograph subjects/events can excuse a lower technical quality of the photo. I'd call a species that only shows up once in 8 years a bit difficult. People here have no problem making exceptions for rare birds that are hard to find, I don't see why underwater creatures should be treated differently. --Cart (talk) 22:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do you have a single nomination where your photos don't get status:). I have the utmost respect for your contributions, you are doing a great job. I am only against the fact that we here are afraid to vote against, because a person has a reputation and gradually after really great photos he nominates photos that are not the best quality, but the community can not vote against. JukoFF (talk) 23:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Do you have a single nomination where your photos don't get status" - I'm sorry , but that comment is just too funny!!! :-D I try to photograph new and/or different things/angles/views/scenes, and because of that I've had my ass kicked more than most regular nominators here. Even on some of the noms that were promoted, I walked away bruised and battered. So yes, I know how it feels to have my photos rejected. If you want some sort of hard statistics, you can read this table and see that about half my noms "don't get status". Trust me, the community has no problem with voting against my photos. The latest one was the nom just before this one. --Cart (talk) 23:15, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Hold on a sec! I think I've figured out what's going on here, and why JukoFF is so outraged when a normal "oppose" would have been enough. I read things like "honorable photographer", "really great photos", something about me being a photographer of reputation who people don't dare to vote against, and that weird thing about me not having lost any noms. These things are usually not remotely associated with me. I think you, JukoFF, has me confused with some other photographer with a similar name, like Code or Colin, both more in line with your high thoughts. And yes, it would be out of character for one of them, with their superior equipment and expertise to nominate a photo of this quality. That would justify your outburst. Me, I'm nowhere near their standard, and I'm as surprised as you are of the warm reception these jelly photos have received. But it's been amusing to be mistaken for one of the "big guys" for a while. :-) I hope this clears things up. --Cart (talk) 03:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sideview of contracted bluefire jellyfish in Brofjorden at Sandvik 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2023 at 11:35:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sideview of contracted bluefire jellyfish in Brofjorden
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class : Scyphozoa
  •  Info The bluefire jellyfishes are smaller and much rarer than the usual ones you see here in the fjords. I have only seen them once in eight years, when a flock appeared in Brofjorden. The blue jellies are streamlined when contracted, and the rim of their top is very lobed so when they expand to get ready for a "swim stroke", they get little resistance from the water until they are fully expanded and ready to contract again. That makes them more agile, quicker and faster swimmers than Cyanea capillata and Aurelia aurita. Their darting movements in the water are more resembling that of dragonflies than other jellies.
I admit I went a bit overboard in photographing them when I finally saw them, but there were very few good photos of them at all and none of them with a free license. It proved to be a good move, since the next day, nearly all of them lay dead and beached on the sand. As the jellies grow weaker, they lose their deep hue and the purple "fire" inside them is extinguished, and they become paler. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Cart (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Yann (talk) 12:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Laitche (talk) 17:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Good to see you nominating photos here again, always liked your work even on occasions I didn't support. This one is a great composition and captures the colours v well Cmao20 (talk) 18:42, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I got new eyes now. Always easier to nominate stuff when you can see. ;-) --Cart (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many congratulations, glad things went well on that front! Cmao20 (talk) 19:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There is no hypocrisy. I have opposed this author's photos more than once and judge all pictures on their merits as I see them not on the identity of the creator. Cmao20 (talk) 22:36, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    And you really think this is a feature photo? If so, please explain to me why. I've been here 15 years, maybe I'm stereotyping, but this is the most common photo. Why is it worthy of status? Off-center, chaotic. Why do you vote? :) JukoFF (talk) 22:48, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Re the "off-center" comment, it's called Lead room. It is common on this forum to use it in photos of things or creatures to indicate movement. --Cart (talk) 22:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for clarifying. So you're sure the jellyfish's next move will be forward:)? JukoFF (talk) 23:04, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it moved forward and I was tracking it. Remember, I was there and actually saw these creatures. FPs can also be cropped if another framing is desired for an article or something. That is what we have the {{Extracted}} template for. --Cart (talk) 23:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why would you want it centred? That would harm the composition in my view. As it is we have a sense of movement in the frame. I supported the photo because it is beautiful and carefully composed. Basile's support argument is really interesting too. Re. 'this is the most common photo', there are only 6 FPs in the category and none of this species, so no it is not. If it is a common image it is certainly not the kind of photo commonly presented on this forum. Cmao20 (talk) 02:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ISS-66 Atmospheric plume from 2022 Hunga Tonga eruption.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2023 at 13:28:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Volcanic ash in atmosphere
I have no problem with that. Would you able to exchange it? Not sure how to do it. If you fix that, I'll glad.--Phoenix CZE (talk) 10:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now fixed. Best of luck with your nom, --Cart (talk) 12:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Oppose this version in favor of the edited alternative. --Cart (talk) 12:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative edited version[edit]

  •  Info Edited and cropped version.
  •  Support per my comment above. --Cart (talk) 12:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support ★ 12:39, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Ok, something went wrong here since the nominator just revived an old FPD-ed nom instead of making a new one. I'm not too familiar with how to to fix the dates here. Asking kindly if A.Savin can help with this. I think you have fixed issues like this before. --Cart (talk) 13:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The show can go on now thanks to the work of A.Savin. :-) --Cart (talk) 13:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Maria Gern mit Untersberg.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2023 at 15:54:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pilgrimage church Maria Gern in the near of Berchtesgaden. in the background the Untersberg
I can recognise the problem. Clone stamp or desaturation would be possible here. --Ermell (talk) 18:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Common kingfisher in Japan, December 2023 - 4925.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2023 at 07:41:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A kingfisher rolling and slamming a small fish onto a tree.
  •  Support Shot is interesting, teling a story. So its beating that fish by the wood. Maybe video. --Mile (talk) 13:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Great action shot! I haven't seen any like this here on Commons before. Capturing motion blur in good way is also about getting some good lines into that photo or it will not work. Here you have a circular motion that is very pleasing. This could also be a candidate for the new gallery Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Intentional motion blur if you prefer that. It's up to you. --Cart (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support as per Cart. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support ★ 00:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose It could have been amazing if the bird had been frozen at high speed. But here the fish is difficult to discern. Precisely because of the blur, the bud of the branch can be assimilated to an extension of this fish. This nomination had the same settings (1/60 sec) thus I suppose the effect (blur) was more unexpected than "intentional". The background seems cluttered and the two blurry branches behind are very distracting, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Basile Morin: Thanks for the comment and thinking carefully. Yes, that two shots are same shutter speed, but what if I was aiming this shot first? :) --Laitche (talk) 01:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Can't prove the contrary of course, the only sure thing in that case is that this one is unexpectedly a success :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sure, only the camera you can control. Low speed definitely allows you to lower the ISO, but perhaps in this situation another view point would have been preferable, or a quicker shutter speed -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment I think that every photographer has to rely on sheer luck and serendipity to a certain extent. Sometimes we get good shots that we weren't expecting.;-) The "intentional" can also be seen as the choice to keep and display a photo with motion blur (or some other chance thing that improves the compo), rather than just deleting it from camera. --Cart (talk) 10:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes, I totally agree with what you're saying. And in that case, if the goal was to capture an "intentional blur", then the other picture, sharp at relatively low speed + high distance + low ISO, is an incredible (unexpected) success. That's maybe why photography is an activity full of surprises / discovery. But at the same time, some distracting elements also enter in the composition, where a painting / drawing would have been spared. I think the bud, and the vertical branch behind, are really misplaced, it is bad luck. I have no personal conviction on the idea of deleting this type of image or not. Some participants seem to be more tolerant of the flaws highlighted. These differences in judgment can constitute indicators. The motion blur may not be trash, it's just not the best example in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Everyone has their own opinion so vote is yours, of course :) --Laitche (talk) 11:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Gorgeous action pic. The motion blur is beautiful, giving the real feeling of the movement. --Selbymay (talk) 11:45, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Just fuzzy image of some bird, no any reason for FP nomination, IHMO -- Karelj (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Weak oppose I think my problem with it is that it's too blurry for me to be able to tell what's going on without the caption, but not blurry enough to be fully an abstract artwork as opposed to an illustrative photo. I think it was a really good try though and I'd love to see any future shots that use a similar idea Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Royal-clipper.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2023 at 22:03:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The 200 passenger sailing ship Royal Clipper - as seen on the Mediterranean in spring 2018.

File:View of Pfronten 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2023 at 09:08:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Breitenberg to Pfronten, Bavaria, Germany
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
  •  Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC); See also the annotations on the nimonation page.Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Llez (talk) 09:08, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Laitche (talk) 02:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support ★ 00:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Dull light, sorry. Very high resolution and spectacular view point, but all over the colors are bland, the background is hazy with blue mountains, and the sky is gray. Useful document, but not one of the best images of the website in my opinion, because the overall appearance is too unattractive. Incidentally, there's a weird dark thing in the sky in the middle right, that does not look like a cloud -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    •  Info "...weird dark thing in the sky..." removed. Remark: Mountains in a distance of 10 to 25 km (see annotations) have mostly a bluish tint. --Llez (talk) 06:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Your photo was taken from the Hopfensee (you can see the Hopfensee on my panorama in a distance of 10 km!), this is only half the distance of the viewpoint of my panorama. The mountains in a distance of your comparing foto look like you describe it (see for example the "3. Pfrontener Berg", "Eselsberg", and "Reuterwanne") --Llez (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The main difference lies less in the distance than in the moment of shooting, and in the direction of the light, in my opinion. The example given above was photographed at 6:39 p.m., with a cooperative sun, and this image here at 12:09 p.m., that is to say in the middle of the day, when the sun falls sharply with a harsh light -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Good quality, impressive panorama that is fun to scroll through but sadly I do find the light very dull Cmao20 (talk) 18:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:023 African pygmy kingfisher at Kibale forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2023 at 08:31:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

African pygmy kingfisher at Kibale forest National Park
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Alcedinidae (Kingfishers)
  •  Info No FPs of this genus (Ispidina) and of this species (Ispidina picta). Created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose We don't have feather definition and if cropped would be too small. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you for your review. You probably have the old file in cache, please refresh the image with F5 key (windows) or Command+R (Mac) on the full size picture page as the feathers have enough definition on the reworked version. This is a very small and shy bird that is not easy to find and photograph. You will not find a picture of this bird with better definition of the feathers on commons. Giles Laurent (talk) 21:06, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I suggest a crop, see note. Yann (talk) 21:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you for the suggestion ! I just uploaded a new version of the file with a slight crop still giving context of the bird habitat. What do you think now Yann ? Giles Laurent (talk) 21:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Better, but there is still too much space on the right with disturbing elements. Idem for the upper left corner. Yann (talk) 21:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    New crop uploaded. What do you think now Yann ? Giles Laurent (talk) 22:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
     Support Very well. Yann (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
     Comment I still oppose. Being the best on Commons means nothing. That's the case for thousands of animal images. Doesn't make it FP, I'm afraid. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    In my view this image is not only of good enough quality of a small and difficult bird to photograph but also benefited from a good lighting situation which highlights the beauty of the beautiful colors of this wild bird. The green background also creates a perfect contrast with the orange, purple, blue and red colors of the bird making it stand out even more. The combination of these elements make this of FP level in my opinion. Giles Laurent (talk) 12:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support ★ 00:47, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I would like more feather definition, too, but considering the bird’s small size and after looking at Ispidina picta photos on Flickr (almost all are inferior) I think the picture deserves the star. --Aristeas (talk) 08:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Weak support A bit small for a bird FP in 2023 but am overall persuaded by the author's points Cmao20 (talk) 18:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Llez (talk) 13:21, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 16:38, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 19:55, 23 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:02, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Olive Groves Fields Spello Umbria Sep23 A7C 07785.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2023 at 06:13:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olive groves in the foothills of Umbria, Italy
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Italy
  •  Info View of olive groves and fields in the foothills and valleys of Umbria, SE of Spello. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 06:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Tagooty (talk) 06:13, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Didn't expect to be taken in by this, but the landscape is very pleasant, and the composition with layering diagonals in the cool light works perfectly. --Cart (talk) 10:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Like Cart, I am really impressed when viewing it in full size. Very typical view and atmosphere for that lovely region. I would try to tweak the white balance – a little bit warmer and a little bit more magenta. But that’s a matter of taste. --Aristeas (talk) 08:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2023 Grindavik eruption.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2023 at 01:56:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Icelandic volcanic eruption
Charlesjsharp, that doesn’t matter for featured pictures as multiple pictures of the same event can be featured pictures. That only applies for Valued images, which is the best of a specific category and/or event. WeatherWriter (talk) 23:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We should never promote a low quality image of a live event like this. If, in a few months time, it turns out to be the 'wow!' image of the volcano, then it can be nominayed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 05:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Indeed even better photos may follow, but IMHO this one is already very impressive. Quality-wise it has a little smartphone touch, i.e. strong sharpening of contours, but this may be just due to the high contrast. --Aristeas (talk) 08:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Wow indeed! ★ 11:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose The photo has "wow" in spades, but the quality is just too low for me, too "smartphone-y". There is also that distracting lower left corner thing. I'm not using a crystal ball comparing this to other photos that may follow (although I'm sure they will since Iceland is becoming a magnet for volcano photographers), but with other photos of volcanic activity we have here. --Cart (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per above, sorry. --A.Savin 16:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per Charles. I think that after an event like this it's always better to wait a while and see what photos turn up than just promote the best one we have right away. Cmao20 (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Quality issues: high JPG compression rate and distracting structure at the lower left corner.  Question Is this version upsized? Can you provide the source where this resolution (4500px large) appears? On the file page, the only source indicated is Twitter, where the resolution is low (only 2000 px large). It may also explain the artifacts visible when we zoom -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:02, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Szénrakodó-esztergom.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2023 at 13:02:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/candidate_list&oldid=835564482"