Butun axtardiqlarinizi tapmaq ucun buraya: DAXIL OLUN
  Mp4 Mp3 Axtar Yukle
  Video Axtar Yukle
  Shekil Axtar Yukle
  Informasiya Melumat Axtar
  Hazir Inshalar Toplusu
  AZERI CHAT + Tanishliq
  1-11 Sinif Derslikler Yukle
  Saglamliq Tibbi Melumat
  Whatsapp Plus Yukle(Yeni)

Jump to content

Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Shortcut
Deutsche Benutzeroberfläche
Diese Projektseite in anderen Sprachen:
Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten

Dies sind die Kandidaten für die exzellenten Bilder. Beachte, dass es sich hierbei nicht um das Bild des Tages handelt.

Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten Springe zu:

Formalien

[edit]

Nominierung

[edit]

Leitsätze für die Nominierung

[edit]

Bitte lies alle Leitsätze vor der Nominierung.

Dies ist eine Zusammenfassung von Kriterien, auf die du bei der Einreichung und Bewertung von Exzellenz-Kandidaten achten solltest:

  • Auflösung – Fotografien mit einer Auflösung unter 2 Millionen Pixel werden in der Regel abgelehnt, außer unter „stark mildernden Umständen“. Beachte, dass ein 1600 x 1200 großes Foto 1,92 Megapixel hat und damit weniger als 2 Millionen.
Grafiken auf Commons können auch in anderen Weisen als zur Anzeige auf einen herkömmlichen Computerbildschirm verwendet werden. Sie können auch als Ausdruck oder zur Anzeige auf hochauflösenden Bildschirmen verwendet werden. Man kann nicht vorhersagen, welche Geräte in Zukunft Anwendung finden, deshalb ist es wichtig, dass die nominierten Bilder die höchstmögliche Auflösung haben.
  • Eingescannte Bilder – solange es keine offizielle Richtlinie gibt, findet man unter Help:Scannen für verschiedene Typen von Bildern Hinweise für die Vorbereitung, die hilfreich sein können.
  • Fokus – jedes wichtige Objekt im Bild sollte normalerweise scharf sein.
  • Vordergrund und Hintergrund – Objekte im Vorder- und Hintergrund können stören. Kontrolliere, ob etwas vor dem Motiv des Bildes wichtige Elemente verdeckt. Auch soll nichts im Hintergrund die Komposition verderben, zum Beispiel eine Straßenlampe, die über dem Kopf einer abgebildeten Person „steht“.
  • Allgemeine Qualität – nominierte Bilder sollten von hoher technischer Qualität sein.
  • Digitale Manipulationen betrügen nicht in jedem Fall den Betrachter. Digitale Nachbearbeitungen, um Fehler von Fotografien zu korrigieren, sind allgemein akzeptiert, vorausgesetzt, sie sind begrenzt und gut gemacht, ohne dabei betrügen zu wollen. Akzeptiert werden normalerweise Beschneiden, perspektivische Korrekturen, Schärfen und Verwischen sowie Farb- und Belichtungskorrekturen. Umfangreichere Korrekturen wie das Entfernen von störenden Hintergrundobjekten sollten in der Bildbeschreibung mit Hilfe der Vorlage {{Retouched picture}} klar beschrieben werden. Nicht oder falsch beschriebenen Manipulationen, die dazu führen, dass das Hauptmotiv falsch dargestellt wird, sind unter keinen Umständen akzeptabel.
  • Wert – unser Hauptziel ist das Hervorheben der wertvollsten Bilder von allen anderen. Bilder sollten irgendwie etwas Besonderes sein. Darum sei dir bewusst, dass:
    • nahezu jeder Sonnenuntergang ästhetisch ansprechend ist und die meisten keinen wesentlichen Unterschied aufweisen zu anderen,
    • Nachtaufnahmen hübsch sind, aber dass man normalerweise mit Aufnahmen bei Tag mehr Details zeigen kann,
    • schön nicht immer wertvoll bedeuten muss.

Auf der fachlichen Seite gibt es die Belichtung, die Komposition, die Bewegungskontrolle und die Fokustiefe zu beachten.

  • Belichtung bezieht sich auf die Verschluss-Blende-Kombination, die ein Bild mit einer Tonkurve wiedergibt. Idealerweise bildet diese Tonkurve in akzeptabler Genauigkeit Schatten- und Spitzlichtbereiche im Bild ab. Dies nennt man „Belichtungsspielraum“. Bilder können im niedrigen Teil der Tonkurve (unterer Bereich), im mittleren (mittlerer Bereich) oder hohen Teil (oberer Bereich) liegen. Digitale Kameras (oder Bilder) haben einen engeren Belichtungsspielraum als Fotofilme. Fehlende Genauigkeit im Schattenbereich ist nicht unbedingt ein Nachteil. Tatsächlich kann dies ein gewünschter Effekt sein. Eingebrannte Spitzenlichter sind dagegen ein störendes Element.
  • Komposition bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Elemente im Bild selbst. Die „Drittel-Regel“ ist ein guter Grundsatz für die Komposition und ein Erbe der Gemäldemalerei. Die Idee ist, das Bild mit jeweils zwei horizontalen und zwei vertikalen Linien zu teilen. Dadurch wird das Bild in horizontale und vertikale Drittel geteilt. Das Motiv im Zentrum des Bildes zu platzieren, ist oft weniger interessant, als es auf einem der vier Schnittpunkte der horizontalen und vertikalen Schnittlinien zu platzieren. Der Horizont sollte eigentlich niemals in der Mitte des Bildes liegen, wo er das Bild in zwei Hälften „teilt“. Die obere oder untere horizontale Linie ist oft eine gute Wahl. Der Hauptgedanke ist, den Raum zu nutzen, um ein dynamisches Bild zu schaffen.
  • Bewegungskontrolle bezieht sich auf die Weise, wie die Bewegung im Bild abgebildet wird. Die Bewegung kann stillstehend oder verschwommen sein. Weder das eine noch das andere ist besser; es kommt auf den Zweck der Aufnahme an. Bewegung ist relativ innerhalb der Objekte des Bildes. Zum Beispiel vermittelt uns das Fotografieren eines relativ zum Hintergrund stillstehenden Rennwagens kein Gefühl für das Tempo oder die Bewegung. Also zwingt uns die Fototechnik, das Motiv stillstehend vor verschwommenem Hintergrund abzubilden, wodurch ein Gefühl für die Bewegung entsteht. Dies nennt man „Schwenken“. Andererseits kann eine Aufnahme eines im Vergleich zur Umgebung stillstehenden Basketballspielers während eines hohen Sprunges das „Unnatürliche“ der Natur dieser Pose sichtbar machen.
  • Fokustiefe (DOF – Depth Of Field) bezieht sich auf den Fokusbereich vor und hinter dem Hauptmotiv. Die Fokustiefe wird abhängig von den spezifischen Erfordernissen jedes Bildes gewählt. Große oder kleine Fokustiefe kann auf die eine oder andere Weise die Qualität der Aufnahme vergrößern oder schmälern. Geringe Fokustiefe kann die Aufmerksamkeit auf das Hauptmotiv des Bildes lenken, das Hauptmotiv erscheint dadurch von seiner Umgebung gelöst. Hohe Fokustiefe bringt Abstände zwischen Motiven zur Geltung. Objektive mit kurzer Brennweite (Weitwinkel) ergeben eine hohe Fokustiefe, umgekehrt haben Objektive mit langer Brennweite (Teleobjektive) eine flache Fokustiefe. Kleine Blendenöffnungen bringen große Fokustiefe, und umgekehrt große Blendenöffnungen bringen flache Fokustiefen.

Bei den grafischen Elementen gibt es Form, Volumen, Farbe, Struktur, Perspektive, Balance, Proportion, usw.

  • Form bezieht sich auf den Umriss des Hauptmotivs.
  • Volumen bezieht sich die dreidimensionale Qualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenlicht herausgebildet. Im Gegenteil zum allgemeinen Glauben ist Frontbeleuchtung nicht die beste Wahl. Frontbeleuchtung lässt das Motiv abflachen. Das beste Tageslicht hat man am frühen Morgen oder nachmittags.
  • Farbe ist wichtig. Übersättigte Farben sind nicht gut.
  • Struktur bezieht sich auf die Oberflächenqualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenbeleuchtung verbessert.
  • Perspektive bezieht sich auf den „Grad“ zusammen mit Linien, die in einen Fluchtpunkt innerhalb oder außerhalb des Bildes enden.
  • Balance bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Motive innerhalb des Bildes, die entweder das scheinbar gleiche Gewicht haben oder schwerer auf einer Seite erscheinen.
  • Proportion bezieht sich auf die Größenunterschiede der Objekte im Bild. Normalerweise tendieren wir dazu, kleine Gegenstände klein im Vergleich zu anderen darzustellen. Eine gute Methode kann aber sein, kleine Objekte groß im Gegensatz zu wirklichen Größenverhältnissen abzubilden. Zum Beispiel: Eine kleine Blume überwiegt gegenüber einem großen Berg. Dies nennt man Maßstabsinversion.
Nicht alle Elemente müssen berücksichtigt werden. Einige Fotografien können anhand individueller Eigenschaften beurteilt werden. Für ein Bild kann die Farbe oder die Struktur wichtig sein, oder Farbe und Strukur, usw.
  • Symbolische Aussage oder Relevanz…. Der Meinungskrieg kann hier beginnen…. Ein schlechtes Bild von einem sehr schwierigen Motiv ist ein besseres Bild als ein gutes Bild von einem gewöhnlichen Motiv. Ein gutes Bild von einem schwierigen Motiv ist ein außergewöhnliches Foto.
Bilder können kulturell beeinflusst sein durch den Fotografen und/oder den Betrachter. Die Bedeutung des Bildes sollte vor dem kulturellen Hintergrund des Bildes beurteilt werden, nicht durch den kulturellen Hintergrund des Betrachters. Ein Bild „spricht“ zu Menschen und hat die Möglichkeit, Emotionen auszulösen, wie zum Beispiel Zärtlichkeit, Zorn, Ablehnung, Heiterkeit, Traurigkeit usw. Gute Fotografen sind nicht darauf beschränkt, gefällige Emotionen zu provozieren.

Um die Chancen für einen Erfolg deiner Nominierung zu erhöhen, lies vor der Nominierung alle Leitsätze.

Eine neue Nominierung aufstellen

[edit]

Wenn du glaubst, ein Bild mit passender Bildbeschreibung und Lizenz gefunden oder geschaffen zu haben, das als wertvoll erachtet werden könnte, folge der anschließenden Anleitung.

Schritt 1: Kopiere den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:), hinter den schon im Feld stehenden Text, zum Beispiel „Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG“. Danach klicke auf die Schaltfäche mit der Aufschrift „neue Nominierung aufstellen“.


Schritt 2: Folge den Anweisungen der geöffneten Seite, und sichere sie.

Schritt 3: Füge manuell einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Kandidatenliste ein: Hier klicken, und füge folgende Zeile OBEN bei der Nominierungslist ein:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG}}

Abstimmung

[edit]

Du kannst folgende Vorlagen benutzen:

  • {{Support}} ( Support) (Stimme zur Unterstützung des Exzellenz-Status),
  • {{Oppose}} ( Oppose) (Stimme gegen den Exzellenz-Status),
  • {{Neutral}} ( Neutral) (neutrale Meinung, keine Stimme),
  • {{Comment}} ( Comment) (es folgt ein Kommentar, keine Stimme),
  • {{Info}} ( Info) (es folgen Informationen, keine Stimme),
  • {{Question}} ( Question) (es folgt eine Frage, keine Stimme)

Du kannst angeben, dass das Bild keine Chance für eine erfogreiche Kandidatur hat. Benutze die Vorlage {{FPX|reason}}, wobei reason angibt, warum das nominierte Bild klar unakzeptabel für die exzellenten Bilder ist.

Weitere Vorlagen gibt es hier.

Bitte füge ein paar Worte an, warum dir das Bild gefällt oder nicht gefällt, insbesondere wenn du dagegen stimmst. Bitte denke auch daran, zu unterschreiben (~~~~). Anonyme Stimmen sind nicht zugelassen.

Abwahlkandidaten der exzellenten Bilder aufstellen

[edit]

Mit der Zeit ändern sich die Standards für die Exzellenten Bilder. Es kann entschieden werden, dass Bilder, die vorher „gut genug“ für die Exzellenten waren, es nicht mehr sind. Dies ist zum Aufstellen eines Bildes, welches deiner Meinung nach es nicht mehr verdient, exzellent zu sein. Dazu wähle mit

  • {{Keep}}  Keep (das Bild verdient es immer noch, als exzellent zu gelten) oder mit
  • {{Delist}}  Delist (das Bild verdient es nicht mehr, als exzellent zu gelten).

Wenn du denkst, dass ein Bild nicht mehr den Exzellenz-Kriterien entspricht, kannst du es für die Abwahl nominieren, indem du den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:) hinter den bereits stehenden Text im Feld kopierst:


In der eben erstellten neuen Seite für die Nomination des Abwahlkandidaten solltest du einfügen:

  • Informationen über den Ursprung des Bildes (Ersteller, Uploader),
  • Einen Link zur originalen Exzellenz-Kandidatur-Seite (es erscheint unter „Links“ auf der Beschreibungsseite),
  • Deine Begründung für die Nominierung und dein Benutzername.

Danach musst du einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Liste der Abwahlkandidaten manuell einfügen.

Richtlinien für Exzellenz-Kandidaten

[edit]

Allgemeine Regeln

[edit]
  1. Nach dem Ende des Abstimmungs-Zeitraumes wird das Ergebnis am Tag 10 nach der Nominierung festgestellt (im Zeitplan weiter unten gezeigt). Also dauert der Abstimmungs-Zeitraum 9 Tage, plus die Stunden bis zum Ende von Tag 9. Stimmen, die an Tag 10 oder danach abgeben wurden, werden nicht gezählt.
  2. Nominierungen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
  3. Mitwirken bei Diskussionen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
  4. Nur Nutzer mit einem commons-account, der mindestens 10 Tage alt ist und 50 Beiträge hat, können wählen. Ausnahme: Die eigene Nominierung kann gewählt werden, unabhängig von Alter und Beiträge.
  5. Die Nominierung zählt nicht als Stimme. Unterstützung muss explizit angegeben werden.
  6. Nominierungen können vom Einsteller jederzeit zurückgezogen werden. Dies geschieht einfach durch das Schreiben von „I withdraw my nomination“ (eng. Ich ziehe meine Nominierung zurück)
    oder durch Hinzufügen von {{withdraw}} ~~~~.
  7. Denke daran, das Ziel von Wikimedia Commons ist es, einen zentralen Speicher für freie Bilder, genutzt von allen Wikimedia-Projekten, bereitzustellen, einschließlich für mögliche zukünftige Projekte. Dies ist nicht einfach ein Speicher für Wikipedia-Bilder, deshalb sollten hier die Bilder nicht danach beurteilt werden, ob sie zu diesem Projekt passen.
  8. Bilder können vorzeitig am Tag 5 (fünfter Tag nach der Nominierung) von der Abstimmungsliste genommen werden („Regel des 5. Tages“):
    1. Wenn sie keine Unterstützung erhalten, die Einsteller nicht mitgezählt.
    2. Wenn sie 10 oder mehr Pro und kein Kontra erhalten haben.
  9. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPX}} markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden, vorausgesetzt, das Bild hat außer von den Einstellern keine positiven Stimmen (Unterstützung) erhalten.
  10. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPD}} (FP denied) markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden.
  11. Es dürfen von einem Benutzer maximal 2 Nominierungen gleichzeitig platziert werden.

Regeln zur Wahl und Abwahl

[edit]

Ein Kandidat wird in die Galerie der exzellenten Bilder aufgenommen, wenn folgende Bedingungen erfüllt sind:

  1. Passende Lizenz (selbstverständlich)
  2. Mindestens 7 positive Stimmen (Pro-Stimmen)
  3. Das Verhältnis von unterstützenden zu ablehnenden Stimmen ist mindestens 2/1 (eine Zwei-Drittel-Mehrheit)
  4. Zwei verschiedene Versionen desselben Bildes können nicht beide exzellent werden, sondern nur das mit der höheren Zahl an Stimmen.

Die Abwahl-Regeln sind dieselben wie zur Wahl der exzellenten Bilder bei gleichbleibenden Abstimmungs-Zeitraum. Die Regel des 5. Tages gilt für Abwahlkandidaten, die keine Stimme für die Aberkennung des Exzellenz-Status' bis zum Tag 5 erhalten haben, außer die des Antragstellers.

Ein erfahrener Nutzer kann die Anfrage beenden. Wie man eine Anfrage beendet, siehe unter Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder/Was tun, wenn der Abstimmungszeitraum zu Ende ist.

Vor allem sei freundlich

[edit]

Bitte bedenke, dass das Bild, das du beurteilst, das wohlüberlegte Werk von jemandem ist. Vermeide Phrasen wie „it looks terrible“ (eng. sieht schrecklich aus) oder „I hate it“ (eng. Ich hasse es). Wenn du dagegen Stellung nehmen musst, tu dies bitte mit Rücksichtnahme. Bedenke außerdem, dass deine Englischkenntnisse nicht die gleichen sein müssen wie die eines anderen. Wähle deine Worte sorgfältig.

Viel Spaß beim Bewerten …, und denke daran: Alle Regeln können gebrochen werden.

Siehe auch

[edit]


Inhaltsübersicht

[edit]

Exzellenz-Kandidaten

[edit]
Seite erneut laden für neue Nominierungen: purge this page's cache
Shortcut
[edit]

File:ISS-46 Northern India at night.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 01:33:54 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Picture of the northern Indian subcontinent at night taken from the International Space Station.

File:2024-07-07 Motorsport, DTM, Norisring Nürnberg 2024 STP 0442-2.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 01:23:03 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

motor sport, DTM, Norisring Nürnberg 2024: Award Ceremony; Nicki Thiim (DEN, Lamborghini, SSR Performance); celebration, Champagne shower

File:Warbling vireo (82141).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 21:06:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Warbling vireo singing

File:Señorita herida (Halichoeres chierchiae), La Paz, Baja California, México, 2024-12-20, DD 35.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 20:44:42 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wounded wrasse (Halichoeres chierchiae), La Paz, Baja California, Mexico

File:View of the Upper Rhine Plain from Battenberg Castle.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 15:26:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Upper Rhine Plain from Battenberg Castle, Germany

File:Instrumente in der Maschinenhalle der Zeche Zollern.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 12:11:37 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Dülmen, Merfeld, Felder -- 2024 -- 0102.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 08:07:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Field and Mühlenbach on the border between Börnste (Kirchspiel) and Merfeld, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

File:Himalaya, Indian Atlas, sheet 66 (15219000), cropped.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 21:52:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Himalaya, Indian Atlas, sheet 66. Scale 1:253,440.
  • Yes, you are right. Map sheets are usually divided in several parts. I don't know the reason why the borders do not align. It is not mentioned at the source. Yann (talk) 18:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you! Well, as I said above, most of the actual map is aligned very well at the borders of the parts, so it does not hurt that the margins are not perfectly aligned. – Aristeas (talk) 19:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dense vegetation on the shore of Brofjorden at Lahälla 1.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 21:19:22 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Forest path through dense vegetation on the shore of Brofjorden at Lahälla, Lysekil Municipality, Sweden.

File:Macaca sylvanus in Michlifen 01.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 20:31:53 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Macaca sylvanus in Michlifen

Mergansers

[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 03:13:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • A hen Red-breasted Merganser in flight in the Barnegat Inlet.
    A hen Red-breasted Merganser in flight in the Barnegat Inlet.
  • A drake Red-breasted Merganser in the Barnegat Inlet.
    A drake Red-breasted Merganser in the Barnegat Inlet.
  • A juvenile drake, Red-breasted Merganser in the Barnegat Inlet.
    A juvenile drake, Red-breasted Merganser in the Barnegat Inlet.
Just talk about how to re-name files
  •  Comment So we've got a drake, hen and youngster as a set. Well that works for me. Nice and sharp photos. However, the file names are all over the place and none of them meet the general Commons naming guidelines. They are more like some sort of code that only bird-people can understand, they need to be more general. If you can suggest better names for them here, I will gladly help you renaming them. Also the name of the location (including the country) should be in the description too. These photos will be seen by people all over the world, so please make it easy for them to understand which English-speaking country Barnegat Inlet is located in. --Cart (talk) 18:20, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry! You are absolutely correct. RBME (Red-Breasted Merganser) BIF (Bird In Flight). I will gladly rename them and I can do it in a way that helps with language barriers. Mergus_serrator_Drake/Hen/Immature Do those work? And I can add Barnegat Inlet_New Jersey_USA a suffix. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 19:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That sounds much better. The four capital letters are especially bewildering, since the British have similar four-letter abbreviations for their bird sanctuaries (RSPB). Do you have file mover rights or do you need help with the renaming? If you want to see correct naming of files, take a look at how Poco a poco names his photos. They have among the clearest names here on Commons and you can get some tips from those, like his nom here at the moment. Btw, good call to add the genus section to the bird gallery, you did that right. I'm just going to add that since you are nominating a set, there is less trouble with re-naming files during a nomination, we usually never recommend that otherwise. I'll keep an eye on this so that the code doesn't break anywhere. --Cart (talk) 20:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! I have been contributing for some time, but it wasn't until last year that someone nominated one of my images for Featured Picture that I learned about these processes. Despite 17 years using wikipedia, I am still a novice. I am not a file mover. What is the best method for me to rename the images or request that the images be renamed? Needsmoreritalin (talk) 21:39, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The easiest and fastest way for these, is if you just write the exact new names you want for the photos right here in a reply to my post, and I'll fix it for you. --Cart (talk) 21:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Wow, it doesn't get easier than that! Thanks again.
    How about:
    Red-Breasted Merganser Hen (Mergus Serrator) Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey, USA
    Red-Breasted Merganser Drake (Mergus Serrator) Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey, USA
    Red-Breasted Merganser Juvenile (Mergus Serrator) Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey, USA Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Okey-dokey, done and fixed. Please also take a look at how I added the info to the 'Description' box on the files, that info should also be in good shape for an FP. --Cart (talk) 22:38, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support These are very nice, well done Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Llez (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I don't understand what kind of set this one is. The closest is probably #4 A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that). I'd accept a set of 2: in flight + swimming or a set of 2: adult and juvenile, but this fulfil no valid set IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Poco a poco, we have been bending the rather short-sighted and rigid rules of sets before. I have no problem with allowing this. And technically speaking, Needsmoreritalin only has this nom of three photos up and running, so given your definition of sets, he could withdraw this and nominate the drake adult and juvenile as one set, and then nominate the hen in a normal separate nom (or any other combination that would fit the set criteria you outline more perfectly). The three photos are great, so I think the outcome would be the same as if we allow this nomination to proceed. To placiate you, perhaps Needsmoreritalin could refrain from making another nomination until this one is over? It's easier to keep this one running instead of going through all that bureaucratic rigmarole. In another current set nomination, Adam is admitting to finding more images for his "complete set of illustrations" saying there might be need for a second set, and no one is getting upset about that. --Cart (talk) 18:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I will not nominate any additional images for Featured Picture consideration until this set is approved or rejected. This was the first time I submitted a set and I appreciate your feedback. Thanks Cart for the support and the suggestion!
    I submitted this as a set because the drake Red-breasted Merganser is very unique in its appearance, the hen and immature Red-Breasted Mergansers look the same. However, when the juvenile male gets a little older it starts wearing eyeliner. There are no Featured Pictures of any species in the genus, Mergus. I thought submitting the three "types" of Mergus Serrator would be a good start.
    This is only my rationale, and you must support or oppose based on your own standards. I respect and accept your decision. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:21, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sets are always tricky since they rely so much on interpreting the rules, and if one photo isn't good the whole thing falls. I've made a couple of sets early on here at FPC, but I have since given up on them, and I prefer to make noms one at a time just to keep things simple. Slow and steady wins in the long run. --Cart (talk) 22:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very good photos. Regarding the set question, I just think of this as “Mergansers family”: mother, father, child ;–). But if this argument is too lax and risqué (the two adults are probably not the parents of that juvenile, although I could not tell the difference ;–)), I second Cart’s pragmatic argumentation. – Aristeas (talk) 18:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image:C62 3 Niseko (2).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 May 2025 at 23:39:33 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The special train pulled by JR Hokkaido's C62 steam locomotive

File:Tractor New Holland T6.165 plowing (Zadobrova, Ljubljana).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 May 2025 at 15:28:43 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tractor New Holland T6.165 plowing (Zadobrova, Ljubljana)
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Slovenia
  •  Info Tractor New Holland T6.165 plowing (Zadobrova, Ljubljana). My shot. --Mile (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment «Light source - Fluorescent» by EXIF.
  •  Support -- Mile (talk) 15:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose As long as two of the three categories aren't fixed properly. --A.Savin 20:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh wow... --A.Savin 08:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment i suppose you Overcat so i remove that one. Otherwise if you any suggestion you can tell. So far, i can see i bother you a lot with Categories. --Mile (talk) 10:00, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very nice view. And Mile, A.Savin does have a point. It would be great if you were just as good at documenting your photos as you are at creating them. People who are interested in your photos shouldn't need to play detectives to find out more about them. It's not enough to only have the location as coordinates, it should be written in the description and with categories. The more info there is on your photo, the more interesting it becomes for re-users, and the more it will be used. It's not bad to have many categories, just as long as they are on different category trees, just look at what's in the image and how you would describe it. It can be useful to remember the three: "What, Where, Who" when you add categories and descriptions. Here it would be: What - a field is being plowed, Where - in Zadobrova, Ljubljana, Slovenia, Who - a New Holland T6.165 tractor is doing it. All these should be represented in some way in the description and categories. I've added that for you on this (and your other nomination) so that we can get this moving, and not have you two growling at each other from your two trenches. --Cart (talk) 10:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The question was rather on the way how he's creating new categories... --A.Savin 19:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It might be easier if you explained that in complete sentences, instead of short threatening bursts. I know, it's tedious and Mile should know better, but so should a lot of long-time users here too, and still we keep needing to remind folks about the most basic things for nominations. It's boring, but it's all we got until some miracle happens and a new code for creating noms is written, that makes sure that all criteria listed at the FPC page are met. --Cart (talk) 21:08, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    For example, "New Holland tractors in Slovenia" should be "Tractors in Slovenia" too. However PetarM is not interested in explanation, I think there are revenge votes from him and I don't have to expect fair treatment. --A.Savin 21:59, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Christ on a Bike! How many more feuding and revenging guys must we put up with here at FPC? We just resolved the last mud-throwing competition only months ago. Stop it this instant, both of you. --Cart (talk) 22:55, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Great, graphical picture - I really like it. Special thanks to Cart for updating the categories. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Great shot. Thank you Cart for your explanation of categories. I find this a clearer explanation than the official rules and I will refer back to it in future. Cmao20 (talk) 12:34, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support per others, and thanks to Cart for the excellent explanation of categories. For my part I often think of the mnemonic verse Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando? – “Who, what, where, by what means, why, how, when?” – when selecting categories. This phrase (from Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica, Iª IIae q. 7 a. 3) summarises the ancient rhetorical theory of peristáseis/circumstances; prospective orators were taught to settle these questions when preparing a court speech, and a simplified version, the Five Ws, is used in modern journalism. Of course normally we do not have categories for all of these 7 or 5 questions, but it does not hurt to check them. – Aristeas (talk) 14:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support excellent photo. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 23:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --XRay 💬 07:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Llez (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Femme en chemise, André Derain, 1906.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 20:55:55 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Woman in a Chemise, by André Derain. 100 x 81 cm, oil on canvas.

File:Focas grises (Halichoerus grypus), playa de Horsey, Norfolk, Inglaterra, 2022-11-20, DD 11.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 18:27:55 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus atlantica), Horsey Beach, Norfolk, England.

File:DC3 Skå June 2017 05.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 18:51:11 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

DC3 (SE-CFP) at Skå airfield, Stockholm County.

File:Cinnamon flycatcher (Pyrrhomyias cinnamomeus pyrrhopterus) San Isidro.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 14:18:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cinnamon flycatcher (Pyrrhomyias cinnamomeus pyrrhopterus)
Gallery fixed. It's great that you added the genus section, you just missed the 'Family' step in the code here on the nom. --Cart (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Multicoloured monkey grasshoppers (Homeomastax sp.) Sumaco.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 14:25:46 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Multicoloured monkey grasshoppers (Homeomastax sp.)
Sorry, not for the knee. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:51, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
New version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On my monopod... Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hyles dahlii

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 11:23:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Male dorsal
    Male dorsal
  • Male ventral
    Male ventral
  • Female dorsal
    Female dorsal
  • Female ventral
    Female ventral

File:Воздушен поглед на Струмичкото Поле.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 05:50:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An aerial view of Strumica Valley

File:Телефонска говорница во Стиник.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 05:30:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A telephone booth in the village of Stinik

File:Horses grazing at Trunkol meadow, Jammu and Kashmir, India (crop).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 05:14:59 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Horses grazing at Trunkol meadow in the Indian Himalayas in Jammu and Kashmir

File:Selyavnoe-Vtoroe-003.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 May 2025 at 21:51:07 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Front Sacred Heart Cathedral Ooty Mar25 A7CR 05528.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 May 2025 at 10:12:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Front view, Sacred Heart Cathedral, Ooty

File:Indian Peacock courtship display at Pench national park (April, 2024) 08.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 May 2025 at 09:55:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Indian Peacock courtship display at Pench national park, Maharashtra.
thewanderersthirdeye, I forgot to say welcome to FPC. :-) I didn't realize you were new here. The easiest thing is to add it as an 'Alternative' to this nom. Because it's a reviewed QI, we can't simply upload the improved version over the old file per COM:OVERWRITE, that is otherwise an option for small changes. No need to withdraw and begin again. I will fix this for you, you can just look at my edits here on the nomination and remember how this is done for future references. You can also support the new alternative if you like, support both or strike the support for the original, it's up to you. --Cart (talk) 14:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

The Bottle Imp

[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 May 2025 at 21:06:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Just noting that there may need to be a second set. Need to double check my book, but I moved recently. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chico Wildflower Century (2025)-104A9764.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 May 2025 at 21:02:50 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A member of the Chico Cycling Team is seen riding up Table Mountain during the 2025 Chico Wildflower Century in Butte County, California

File:Weißstorch-am-Wasser-Vogelpark-Marlow-2025.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 May 2025 at 06:25:42 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White stork in bird park Vogelpark Marlow wading through a pond

File:Canon EOS R50 (52694437103).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 May 2025 at 21:03:21 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White Canon EOS R50

File:Steinerlebnispfad Zeilberg, Hütte im Wald im Osten.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 May 2025 at 19:03:02 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

House in the forest on the Zeilberg near Maroldsweisach

File:Soldier onboard M77 Ulvön in Lysekil 1.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 May 2025 at 11:53:07 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Female soldier standing guard onboard mine countermeasures vessel M77 Ulvön, moored in Lysekil, Sweden.

File:Sichelsee und Großer Wörthsee Augsfeld 2025-02.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 May 2025 at 11:45:54 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Sickle lake" and "Great Wörth Lake" geotope near Augsfeld (Haßfurt)
  •  Comment Thank you very much for the hint, Milseburg - I completely overlooked those two stitching errors in the clouds. @Plozessor, would you mind removing them? If you're short on time, feel free to use my retouch attempt instead (SwissTransfer link) for an update, if the result looks okay to you. I also adjusted the blue tone a bit in the sky to make it feel more balanced. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Milseburg Oops, I checked for stitching errors in the lake and background but not in the sky. Thx for spotting, I think I fixed all of the issues you mentioned. Please have another look! Plozessor (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chêne, colza, Jura (horizontal).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 May 2025 at 18:14:46 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

English oak standing in the middle of a rapeseed field with the Jura Mountains background. Versonnex (Ain), France.

File:Tractor John Deere 6320 with front and rear mower cutting grass.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 May 2025 at 15:49:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tractor John Deere 6320 with front and rear mower cutting grass

File:46-218-0001 Zolochiv Castle RB 24.jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 May 2025 at 11:50:20 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Top down view on castle in Zolochiv, Ukraine.

File:Glassy Glacial Lake (54441988747).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 May 2025 at 18:03:49 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •  Weak support Agree that the editing has added a bit too much contrast/clarity, but nevertheless I cannot help to be impressed. Of course Cart’s version looks better to me, I would give full support to it if you could add it as an alternative version. – Aristeas (talk) 19:08, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

[edit]

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2025 at 20:32:18 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Image of the Black Madonna in the basilica of Our Lady of the Daurade, Toulouse, France.
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France
  •  Info Image of the Black Madonna in the basilica of Our Lady of the Daurade, Toulouse, France. The first church in this location was established in 410 when Emperor Honorius allowed the conversion of pagan temples to Christianity. The original building of Notre-Dame de la Daurade was a temple dedicated to Apollo. During the 5th or 6th century another church was erected, decorated with golden mosaics; the current name derives from the antique name, (“Deaurata”, gold). It became a Benedictine monastery during the 9th century. After a period of decline starting in the 15th century, the basilica was demolished in 1761 to make way for the construction of Toulouse's riverside quays. The buildings were restored and a new church built, but the monastery was closed during the French Revolution, becoming a tobacco factory. The basilica had housed the shrine of a Black Madonna. The original icon was stolen in the fifteenth century, and its first replacement was burned by Revolutionaries in 1799 on the Place du Capitole. The icon presented today is an 1807 copy of the fifteenth century Madonna. Blackened by the hosts of candles, the second Madonna has been known since the sixteenth century as Notre Dame La Noire. The current edifice was built during the 19th century. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:32, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:32, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose for now I hope this is taken in the spirit of constructive criticism but I really am not convinced by your current processing algorithm. In this and your previous nomination, which you kindly corrected/improved at my request, the reprocessed version you have uploaded in 2025 has made the text on the signs in the church far less legible than it was in the original versions in the file history uploaded in 2022/2023. What is sharp and easily readable in the earlier versions is now blurry, smudged, and sometimes seems to contain characters that don't really even look like letters. It is obvious in this image if you zoom in to virtually any noticeboard, sign, or monument with lettering.
I wonder whether your processing software is applying some form of AI-based sharpening or noise reduction without you being aware. AI is a huge fad at the moment, and I notice that photo processing software is often jumping on that bandwagon, adding AI-based features that are sold to us as a great improvement while they are actually quite dubious. AI is notoriously bad at handling text, and its sharpening algorithms often work by interpolating textures, which can easily smooth out details like text where precise rendering of individual pixels is important.
I am keen to support this picture but on principle I won't support a version that's to my mind obviously worse than the 2023 version. I can see that the new version does have certain advantages - the altar is a little bit sharper - but for me these are far outweighed by the poor rendering of fine detail. One of the things I like about your church interiors is that, like David Iliff's and DXR's, they contain plenty of interesting detail to explore at full size. It would be a huge shame to lose this. Cmao20 (talk) 22:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your feedback, Cmao20, I addressed the issue. I hope this version looks much better. Poco a poco (talk) 08:54, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Yes, that's what I want it to look like Cmao20 (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 21:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2025 at 16:43:28 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

is an Iranian singer-songwriter. Hajipour rose to fame after the release of his single "" which has been described as "the anthem" of the 2022 protests. In 2023, he won the first Grammy Award for Best Song for Social Change at the 65th Annual Grammy Awards for "Baraye". On 1 March 2024, Hajipour was sentenced to 3 years and 8 months of jail and ordered to write anti-America-Aggression music because of "Baraye", a song that won Best Song for Social Change at the 65th Annual Grammy Awards.
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tanguar haor, Bangladesh 01.jpg (delist), not delisted

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2025 at 16:20:58
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  •  Delist and surprised at the 27 support to 0 oppose of original nom. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:15, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks to Abdulmominbd for providing evidence of the image’s authenticity. I understand that this discussion may have been uncomfortable but it is also essential given how often undisclosed manipulations do get featured at FPC.
    For me, the image though not a photomontage is still not FP—a significant part of the image is completely black, the saturation brush in the sky is way too obvious, the wetland i.e. the titular subject is cropped out. To me, the unedited actually looks better (even FP worthy with some editing). Perhaps it could have been edited differently? For now I am not striking my vote, will revisit this later. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:14, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • A side  Comment Looking at the author’s stream, I can see that many, if not most, of the shots are overedited, overprocessed, and extensively oversaturated. Yet many of them have Wiki Loves Earth winner badges, picture of the day stars, and featured awards. I wonder if encyclopedias actually need these kinds of images featured on their pages? I’m talking about a broader set of winners on Wiki Loves Earth. If you look at Wiki Loves Earth winner pages from many countries, many of the top entries there are overedited and oversaturated to the extent that they have nothing to do with realistic photography. There seems to be a competence/expertise issue among the judges. It’s like pop culture eating encyclopedia culture ;) To quote: “The primary driving forces behind popular culture, especially when speaking of Western popular cultures, are the mass media, mass appeal, marketing”. It’s probably fine to have pop culture, but it’s not OK to substitute encyclopedia work on summary of knowledge with pop culture or fantasy culture. --Argenberg (talk) 21:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a constant stream of positive votes in the original nomination, and the only user who questioned the nomination with regard to editing was Charlesjsharp. This particular image, aside from being a photomontage, is actually OK tonality-wise. One could imagine taking a shot like this with a telephoto lens and minimal post-processing. --Argenberg (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that the judging on Wiki Loves Earth and Wiki Loves Monuments is often poor. There are good pictures that win awards, but they are frequently beaten by low-quality, oversaturated, heavily processed, unrealistic slop. The judging here is much better, although as this picture shows, we can make mistakes. I don't know how judges for WLE and WLM are chosen. I was once approached to judge WLM Bangladesh, which was good fun, but that is my entire involvement with them. It would be good if these contests solicited the opinions of people who are more skilled photography critics from here, QIC, VIC and elsewhere. Cmao20 (talk) 22:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I cannot go into details (that would be rather impolite), but I can tell you from my own experience that often some other jury members don’t like it if one gets picky about details; they think that is boring nitpicking. – Aristeas (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This says a lot about the competence of such judges. It could be one of the dividing lines between the smartphone/pop/marketing culture mentioned above and the photography/encyclopedia culture. One aims to impress and manipulate, while the other tries to educate. And education is tough, much harder than marketing, because it takes more energy to build up new neural circuits and pathways in the brain. --Argenberg (talk) 19:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist  Keep It's unfortunate that this was promoted, but at the time we were still a bit naive here at FPC. A montage was suspected, I remember more chatter about this in e-mails than on the FPC page, so it went undocumented. I know that people were checking if all the ducks were different, maybe a composite from one duck flying past and several exposures used. But it was before schablons popped up in every editing program, and we simply didn't know what to look for. Now we are more seasoned by AI and more wary. Shit happened, and now that we are wiser, it can be corrected. --Cart (talk) 11:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's natural to have doubts about anything that seems unusual, but as you know, reality can often be stranger than fiction. Back in 2017, while traveling in Tanguar Haor, I was on a boat capturing the men in silhouette light when by chance some birds flew into the frame. Whenever I shared this photo on my social media pages, people often assumed it was a montage or some sort of manipulation, much like you're doing now. To clear things up, I'm sharing the original files with you. Please have a look and let's settle this, as it's honestly a bit embarrassing for me. At the time, I was new to photography and used to shoot in JPEG to save space and also my editing skill was very poor. I have also included the photo taken just after the shot in question to help provide context. The files are downloadable, so feel free to inspect them thoroughly. Google Drive Link Abdulmominbd (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very happy to be proved wrong in this. There is still some wonder in the world. Of course I apologize to you. --Cart (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist It’s a pity because this particular image is, as Argenberg stated, “aside from being a photomontage, […] actually OK tonality-wise”. I guess this also explains the broad consent in the original nomination. Many manipulated images are totally overdone and immediately look unrealistic; this one is better. I would love to see the original image before the montage. Maybe it would still be a FP, and with more right than this manipulated version. But we don’t have the choice. – Aristeas (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's natural to have doubts about anything that seems unusual, but as you know, reality can often be stranger than fiction. Back in 2017, while traveling in Tanguar Haor, I was on a boat capturing the men in silhouette light when by chance some birds flew into the frame. Whenever I shared this photo on my social media pages, people often assumed it was a montage or some sort of manipulation, much like you're doing now. To clear things up, I'm sharing the original files with you. Please have a look and let's settle this, as it's honestly a bit embarrassing for me. At the time, I was new to photography and used to shoot in JPEG to save space and also my editing skill was very poor. I have also included the photo taken just after the shot in question to help provide context. The files are downloadable, so feel free to inspect them thoroughly. Google Drive Link Abdulmominbd (talk) 18:34, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much for sharing the files, Abdulmominbd! I’m happy to learn that the photo is authentic. I will take a closer look tomorrow, but have striked my oppose vote. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Keep Just for the record: I can confirm that the metadata of the provided JPEG files look completely authentic. I can reproduce the look of the discussed image by ca. 1 minute of editing of the provided original JPEG (only removing CAs and reducing the sharpening applied by the camera would take longer). So I have to apologize to you, Abdulmominbd, and want to thank you again for sharing the original images for comparison. Congratulations to this great shot and I wish you always good light and many more wonderful photos! – Aristeas (talk) 07:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Good capture. But the image is quite heavily edited with newly introduced hues (yellow in the sky). This gives it a different, slightly surreal atmosphere. --Argenberg (talk) 19:59, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Great, EXIF tell Ver.1.02 which is camera firmware, early one. Probably its all fine here, just edit was a bit strange. Birds have colors, some have CA - so "lens mistake". Abdulmominbd Thanx for showing up. So now is can this edit be FP or not. --Mile (talk) 19:04, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep obviously Юрий Д.К 21:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak keep Clearly overprocessed (yellow sky and what looks like mist) but not fake (genuine shot with real silhouettes of accurate proportions) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Thank you, Abdulmominbd, for stepping forward with transparency and sharing the original files—it takes humility and integrity to do so, especially in such a charged discussion. It's a reminder that sometimes extraordinary moments do happen in real life, and scepticism, while healthy, must be open to evidence. This image may be imperfect from a technical or post-processing standpoint, but the authenticity you've demonstrated deserves appreciation. I hope this experience encourages continued dialogue grounded in both critical thinking and mutual respect. --Moheen (keep talking) 10:13, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per consensus above. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep, satisfied with the explanation from the uploader.--Rocky Masum (talk) 03:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep My taste: the original shot was even better. Thanks for having show it to us. --Harlock81 (talk) 17:00, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 delist, 9 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Zeitplan (Tag 5 nach der Nominierung)

[edit]
Mon 05 May → Sat 10 May
Tue 06 May → Sun 11 May
Wed 07 May → Mon 12 May
Thu 08 May → Tue 13 May
Fri 09 May → Wed 14 May
Sat 10 May → Thu 15 May

Zeitplan (Tag 10 nach der Nominierung)

[edit]
Wed 30 Apr → Sat 10 May
Thu 01 May → Sun 11 May
Fri 02 May → Mon 12 May
Sat 03 May → Tue 13 May
Sun 04 May → Wed 14 May
Mon 05 May → Thu 15 May
Tue 06 May → Fri 16 May
Wed 07 May → Sat 17 May
Thu 08 May → Sun 18 May
Fri 09 May → Mon 19 May
Sat 10 May → Tue 20 May
Retrieved from "/w/index.php?title=Commons:Kandidaten_für_exzellente_Bilder&oldid=978969898"
Informasiya Melumat Axtar