Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Archives/Jan-Mar 2011

WP:PPRA

Please cut and paste nominations to be archived from the Picture peer review mainpage to the top of the appropriate archive page, creating a new archive (by nomination date) when necessary.

2012: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2011: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2010: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2009: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2008: January - March | April - June | July - September | October - December
2007: January - June | July - December
2006: January - December

Munidopsis polymorpha

These crabs reside underwater in the Jameos Del Agua making it very difficult to get a good shot. It's been cropped to remove the flash reflection as much as I could. Could anything be done to improve it more?

Articles this image appears in: Munidopsis polymorpha

Creator: Martyx

Suggested by: martyx tkctgy 15:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I'm sorry, I don't think this picture has FP potential. I fully understand it's a very hard thing to take a photo of, maybe you could consider Valued Images at commons. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your comments. Can I ask specifically why this isn't of FP potential? Is there anything I could have to improve the shot? I guess the article is only a stub which also doesn't help matters. martyx tkctgy 13:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Some possible reasons. Resolution is too small - yes it's over the 1000px requirement, but realistically the subject is only a small part in the centre of the image, meaning the subject itself is well below requirements. Focus on the beastie just isn't good enough, meaning it lacks details. For a comparison go to say Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects and open some of those images up fullsize (and I mean not just image page size) - compare the quality, details, and sharpness. Background is pretty messy looking; it would have been better on the centre of the rock, not over the join. The composition issue you could certainly fix by reshooting, but realistically (and I don't mean to sound too negative) you're not going to get a macro FP with that camera. I would say any such FP in probably at least the last five years would have been taken with a DSLR, and mostly with specialised macro lenses and usually off camera flashes. In general people would be shooting with say a minimum of $2000 of equipment; you can't match that with a little compact camera. Granted there would be some considerations given to it being underwater (I think that's what you've suggested), but that wouldn't mitigate enough. Thanks for your contributions though. --jjron (talk) 15:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. If I get a chance to revisit Lanzarote in the near future I will try to take another shot of these crabs. The issues posed are the fact they are underwater, blind, and typically immobile. The other issue being the very limited access to take photos (avoid the other tourists). I think if I were to get any closer my camera would have been under the water! I guess this was more of a lucky shot rather than anything particularly special! And whilst not $2000 the Canon PowerShot SX1 IS is by no means compact! In this shot I did also use a separate flash mounted to the hot shoe. martyx tkctgy 15:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I probably should have said above, but voters tend to prefer 'perfect' specimens. This guy's got one claw pointing down, meaning you can't really see it, and his legs are all over the place, rather than being roughly symmetrical (and I'm not sure, but is he missing a leg?). So if you get a chance to reshoot perhaps keep that in mind (given they're pretty immobile, it's not possible to nudge them a bit into position is it?), but yeah, being underwater is going to make it hard. --jjron (talk) 12:05, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to the position of the claw. Resolution meets minimum requirement. I like the image but it has some problems with what look like shadows or reflections, so it's not quite FP, but you certainly could try for VP on Commons. Pine _{(was GreenPine)} ^talk 21:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Best Photos Around The World — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jatinwb (talk • contribs) 11:36, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nanchan Temple

I think this photo is an excellent one of the main hall of Nanchan Temple, China's oldest timber building. It has good contrast and lighting and because of the foreground, gives the viewer a good approximation of what being in the temple is really like.

Articles this image appears in: Nanchan Temple

Creator: zeus1234

Suggested by: Zeus1234 (talk) 16:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The advice I'd give you is to try to do something with the shadows. The shadow of the roof on the building is distracting, you could try to lighten it a bit in photoshop or similar. The bushes on the sides are also a bit distracting - could you crop them out?, or maybe also try to somehow fix the dark shadows in them. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 18:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quite a few blown or nearly blown highlights. I'd say this probably needs to be re-shot at a different time of day for better lighting. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Lotus in a pond

Beautiful image with highly detailed lotus

Articles this image appears in

Creator: Tatiraju.rishabh

Suggested by: Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 04:16, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

It's a nice picture, but I'm afraid it's not quite up to FP quality. The focus/details are not enormous, and the background is a bit messy. would it be possible to retake with a bit more attention on the background? Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:56, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Blown highlights. This needs re-shot in better light conditions. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Possibly with a polarizing filter to reduce the glare off the water?. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 21:38, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Earth's Location in the Universe

Original - A diagram of Earth’s location in the Universe in a series of eight maps that show from left to right, the Earth, inside the Solar System, inside the Solar Interstellar Neighborhood, inside the Milky Way, inside the Local Galactic Group, inside the Virgo Supercluster, inside our local superclusters, and finally finishing inside the entire observable Universe.

I think the diagram represents a striking and astonishing fact of nature showing Earth’s tiny scale in comparison to the enormous cosmos we reside it. I believe it agrees with FP guidelines and should be featured for visitors to observe. Note that I marked the image as square because the pano and landscape were too large for the page.

Articles this image appears in: Local Group, Supercluster, Virgo Supercluster, Observable universe, Milky Way, and Earth's location in the universe

Creator: Andrew Colvin

Suggested by: A. Z. Colvin • Talk 05:51, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I guess the first question that would be asked is why isn't this svg? JJ Harrison (talk) 07:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I used Photoshop and a 3D modeling program for the diagram. I am not very familiar with Inkscape, but I know that parts of the image are not made with vectors meaning that they would not be scalable. It would become blurry. I am not knowledgeable about how SVG works, but I am almost sure it requires all aspects of the image to be vectors. A. Z. Colvin • Talk 02:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding svg: it is possible to embed raster images into them, but indeed this is usually undesirable. I believe in this case it may be nice to have it in all vectors, using illustrations instead of raster images. Another thing: I much prefer the resolution of File:Earth's Location in the Universe SMALLER (JPEG).jpg. It's easier to take in at full size. And also, it would be nice to have a scale (in lightyears) for each depiction, so we get an idea of how large it gets (and how tiny the Earth really is!). Jujutacular ^talk 02:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding vectors: for example something like File:Emblem-earth.svg could be used for the earth image. Jujutacular ^talk 03:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Tahrir Square

An amazing photo during an amazing event

Articles this image appears in: 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests, 2011 Egyptian revolution and Egypt

Creator: Drumzo

Suggested by: The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 09:50, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I don't think it's FP ready yet. There is a big ball of light in the middle making it hard to see and actully looking more at it; the picture looks like it was taken through a window. Also lots of noise. If we still had VP it would be perfect but FP wise I don't see it. Spongie555 (talk) 06:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, I have to agree with the above - a historic image, but unfortunately not of the quality or resolution that would pass at FP seeing as it was taken only a month ago. Certainly a valuable image for the encyclopedia, though - thank you. Bob talk 23:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

White tower detail

I think this simply is a good photo.

Articles this image appears in: Hradec Králové

Creator: Kozuch

Suggested by: Kozuch (talk) 10:16, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I guess the inevitable question is why not show the whole thing? JJ Harrison (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I should probably add that I can remember standing in that tower. My Grandmother was from Hradec Králové. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- This shot is simply meant as a tower top detail and as the tower is in the center of historic town, from this angle (45 degrees) you can not shoot if whole because of other buildings anyway. The same is with the tight crop - this was shot thgouth a little space between other buildings... I guess the tight crop might be a problem in FPC?--Kozuch (talk) 09:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - My guess is that people wouldn't be happy with the tight crop. Perhaps it'd be better to photograph the whole square including the foreground buildings? JJ Harrison (talk) 09:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - The image was extended a bit.--Kozuch (talk) 09:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Belvedere auf dem Pfingstberg

Tbh, because it took ages to stich together, and I'm really (too) proud of it.

Articles this image appears in: Belvedere auf dem Pfingstberg

Creator: Aaadddaaammm

Suggested by: Aaadddaaammm (talk) 10:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Seconder

Taklamakan Desert Sand Dunes from outer space.

Very beautiful image from outer space.

Articles this image appears in: Dunes, Taklamakan Desert

Creator: NASA Landsat

Suggested by: Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 17:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Its an interesting image, but the resolution is low. Have you checked NASA to see if a higher quality version is available? JJ Harrison (talk) 23:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was taken from NASA's WorldWind Software. I'll try my best to gat a higher resolution. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 07:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there no high-res version available Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 03:53, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take adjacent images and blend them together to make it bigger overall? Resolution questions are a little bit silly when you're taking a photo of a fractal. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Good thing it isn't a photo of a fractal :P. JJ Harrison (talk) 21:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - It totally is a fractal (until you get close to individual grains, but that's not exactly a problem here). Aaadddaaammm (talk) 19:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is a nice picture, but pretty low resolution. Be careful with the term "outer space" too. This image is almost certainly captured from low earth orbit, which is not outer space. - Zephyris _Talk 23:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Zion Canyon in winter

Very pretty contrasts in hue, luminosity. Cliffs, mountains, and clouds!

Articles this image appears in: Virgin River

Creator: Douglas Dietiker

Suggested by: Comet Tuttle (talk) 19:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Nice, but the low resolution makes passing unlikely. JJ Harrison (talk) 07:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty, but I don't think this light is ideal for an encyclopedic picture. JJ's right about the size too. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:03, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Emperor Penguin Kiss

I found this image on a National Science Foundation website, and I thought it may be of good enough quality to get FP. Thoughts? Best, Mifter (talk) 01:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles this image appears in: Emperor Penguin

Creator: Glenn Grant, National Science Foundation

Suggested by: Mifter (talk) 01:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

If the foreground was brightened up and there was reference to "kissing" in the article, then it'd have a pretty good chance in my view. JJ Harrison (talk) 00:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on both points with JJ. Jujutacular ^talk 02:59, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Ferrari F40

It's quite unusual to have a good "moving" shot of a car that's in focus, especially one as nice as this (you can even read the brake calipers). Has good encyclopedic value. I don't think we have many car FPs, so this might be a good potential candidate.

Articles this image appears in: Ferrari F40

Creator: Will ainsworth

Suggested by: Bob talk 18:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Looks good, but don't trust my outdated opinion. MER-C 02:55, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Native range of the painted turtle

I'm proud of all the work that Fallschirmjäger did to combine information into this complicated presentation. I also think that quality maps are very important for biological articles and something for WP to tout.

Articles this image appears in: Painted turtle

Creator: Fallschirmjäger

Suggested by: TCO (talk) 00:44, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The obvious criticism is that it requires sources. Even if they're the ones used at the article, they should be listed on the file page. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I linked to a diff for the article section. If anything else needed, please advise.TCO (talk) 00:18, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Added a full list of sources used for the map data, which should cover this base. Fallschirmjäger ✉ 18:54, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

The Birth of Venus

It has good EV, good detail and is of high quality.

Articles this image appears in: The Birth of Venus (Botticelli), Sandro Botticelli, GLaDOS

Creator: Sandro Botticelli

Suggested by: Secret Saturdays (talk to me)^{what's new?} 17:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

We used to have a Birth of Venus FP, but it was delisted. The foot is cut off in that one and in this once (see File:La naissance de Vénus.jpg for the full foot). For FP, we'd need a version with the complete foot. We also want one with accurate colors. I'm not sure what the accurate colors are; I've seen a bunch of different versions. Makeemlighter (talk) 21:49, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

TV aerial plug

I borrowed a friend's macro lens and had a go at image stacking with CombineZP. I removed a slight halo with GIMP. The connector is made of soft aluminium and is assembled by hand onto the end of a cable cut to length.

Articles this image appears in: TV aerial plug and List of video connectors

Creator: Colin

Suggested by: Colin°^Talk 20:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Would it be possible to get a picture of one in better shape? This plug seems fairly beat up. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm afraid I have given the lens back and so can't take any more pictures. All I can do is adjustments to the set of pictures I took. The marks and scratches are a feature of its soft aluminium rather than having had a particularly hard life. I guess a stainless-stell one would look smarter, but less interesting?. Colin°^Talk 07:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- BTW, there's another pic I took at File:F Connector Side.jpg. I didn't post both here as I thought the comments would be similar. It is a different kind of connector but still a stacked macro shot. Colin°^Talk 11:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - The photos are well done, but I'd expect some impedance (heh) due to the less than virgin nature of the connectors. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks for the comment. I guess I need to take pictures of brand new stuff. Colin°^Talk 10:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

The Bank Hall 'Fallen Sequoia'

The photo is a clear view of the fallen sequoia, at Bank Hall in Bretherton, the view has never been seen before due to the sycamore trees that once surrounded it, blocking the view. The tree is one of only two specimen in the UK, which is not the trees natural environment, making this tree very rare in the British Isles.

Articles this image appears in: Bank Hall Gardens, Arboretum

Creator: Bankhallbretherton

Suggested by: Bankhallbretherton (talk) 01:43, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I'm not sure that it has particularly good EV (encyclopedic value) in either article. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Grizzly Bear & Salmon

Grizzly bears and salmon runs both are important parts of Alaska ecosystem. While pictures of Katmai bears are hardly unique, very few (if any) are available under Creative Commons or other free licenses.

Articles this image appears in: Grizzly bear, Katmai National Park and Preserve

Creator: Azov

Suggested by: Azov (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

It looks like you've done some strange processing on this image - up close it looks more like an oil painting than a photo. With this sort of manipulation, it's unlikely to pass. Could you upload the original? Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is a spectacular photo, I don't see this strange processing, if I were you I would go for Good Picture status straight away, and then featured picture. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 10:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This image was probably captured at a high iso and it looks like there has been a heavy denoise or median filter applied. A better denoising algorithm would improve this picture greatly. - Zephyris _Talk 23:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

File:The Kansas Speedway.jpg

I believe this is a featured picture, because it has the right brightness and isn't blurred.

Articles this image appears in: Kansas Speedway, 2010 Price Chopper 400

Creator: Balaji

Suggested by: Nascar 1996 23:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The image is tilted, and I believe slightly oversaturated. There are also noticeable JPEG artifacts, noticeable in the sky and possibly loss of detail in the racing track. It would be better from an enc perspective for there to be racing cars with motion blur. MER-C 02:53, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it's a tiny bit tilted, but I don't have a problem with the saturation. JPEG artefacts are really subtle, but yea they do exist. My main complaint is the busy composition. Maybe crop the tower on the right out? Aaadddaaammm (talk) 10:44, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It has been cropped. Nascar 1996 16:18, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Much better, but still not sure if it's good enough got a FP. I'm no pro around here though, so don't take my word as gospel! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Usher speech

stumbled across this at Flickr. Has a high resolution and seems to be of technical high quality. I do not know much about the finer details of imagery, so any comments would be appreciated. Does this have a chance at FPC?

Articles this image appears in: Usher (entertainer)

Creator: David Berkowitz

Suggested by: Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Sorry, it's a perfectly okay photo, but nowhere near FP quality IMO. It's cropped too tightly at the sides, the pose is ordinary, there's a lot of noise and I don't care for the shadow and glare from the flash. Given he's wearing sunglasses inside, I assume they're part of his public persona, but they might be unpopular at FPC too. Comparing Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment with some failed nominations of celebrity photos in 2010 gives an idea of the standard needed. --Avenue (talk) 13:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

The shadow from the flash kills the pic for me. I would have flagged this as discard on that point alone if I took it.

Purandar Fort

Beautiful Landscape

Articles this image appears in: Purandar fort

Creator: Rishabh Tatiraju

Suggested by: Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 08:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

It is a nice piece of landscape but the haze really holds the image quality back. Would it be possible to retake the picture on a clearer day? The framing could also be better - a wider view of the surrounding landscape (e.g a ~5:3 aspect ratio) would be nice. - Zephyris _Talk 23:13, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

Saint Usuge Spaniel

It's a very high resolution shot compared to most shots of dog breeds. I've done a little work on it such as removing the copyright tag placed there by the creator and balancing out the colors. This is the first time I've looked into FP's, so while I think it meets the criteria, I'm prepared to be corrected. :)

Articles this image appears in: Saint Usuge Spaniel

Creator: DanielV27 (On Commons)

Suggested by: Miyagawa talk 23:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Seconder

Maxim Gorky

High quality, restored version of an historic image of a notable Russian political figure.

Articles this image appears in: Maxim Gorky, List of Russian language novelists, List of Russian people

Creator: Library of Congress, edited by Fallschirmjäger

Suggested by: Fallschirmjäger ✉ 22:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Pretty good I think. Restoration has been documented and there is a link to the original, which is important too. Noodle snacks (talk) 04:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder

1944 German Military Mark

It is a sample of German WWII currency, with a low serial number, and is in decent condition.

Articles this image appears in: Reichsmark

Creator: Sumsum2010

Suggested by: Sumsum2010·T·C 21:54, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

There are images out there without such prominent creasing. Are any available to us? Noodle snacks (talk) 04:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't seem to find any Wikipedia appropriate images. This is the only one of this particular denomination of banknote I currently can attain. Would flattening the bill under some heavy books help remove the creases? Sumsum2010·T·C 05:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'd try that. It needs higher resolution to pass too. I'd suggest a scanner set to high resolution instead of a camera. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ok I'll see what I can do. Sumsum2010·T·C 17:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For similar Banknotes have a look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Billet_drapeau_de_100_francs_recto.jpg . best regards --Drdoht (talk) 15:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder