Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:16-03-30-Jerusalem Mishkenot Sha’ananim-RalfR-DSCF7637.jpg

File:16-03-30-Jerusalem Mishkenot Sha’ananim-RalfR-DSCF7637.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2016 at 22:42:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:16-03-30-Jerusalem Mishkenot Sha’ananim-RalfR-DSCF7637.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:16-03-30-Jerusalem Mishkenot Sha’ananim-RalfR-DSCF7637.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
•  Info Sculpture at Mishkenot Sha’ananim, Jerusalem - all by me-- Ralf Roleček 22:42, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ralf Roleček 22:42, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support INeverCry 22:55, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Nice reflection of you. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment - Nice picture, except that the sky and its reflection are noisy enough to bug me at full size. Can you denoise more? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:17, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support w.carter-Talk 13:13, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose for some little yet serious problems: 1. the distracting streetlamp ought at least to be cloned out. Could have been avoided by a slightly lower camera position. 2. Picture is noisy (sky and sky reflection) and oversharpened (e.g. edges of the bush on the right). 3. I find the composition a bit irritating, I’ve got no idea what size that sphere is and what’s the distance from it – I reckon the camera’s rather close to it. I’d prefer a more distant shot at a standard focal length to get a better feeling of dimensions, never having seen it for real. That’s a matter of taste of course, it just keeps the wow off me. --Kreuzschnabel 14:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC) – Vote changed to  Neutral, I’m still not quite sold on this one but no reason to keep it from a feature. --Kreuzschnabel 06:51, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment I agree that the street lamp could take a hike, but I don't have any problem with size definition since there are three spotlights at the base as reference points. w.carter-Talk 15:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

•  Support ...and 7 --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 17:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support, although +1 to losing the lamp. Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • ok, i have denoised the blue parts a bit and the lamp is saw off. --Ralf Roleček 20:03, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

• Yay! Go digi-vandals! ;) w.carter-Talk 21:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
•  CommentSomething went wrong with the edit, the part where the lamp was is now considerably noisier than its surrounding. I reckon the cloned area wasn’t selected for the denoise. Won’t look fine in a print this way. Would you fix it? --Kreuzschnabel 06:44, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

• Ich habe das nicht mit Auswahl gemacht sondern auf einer Smartebene mit Pinsel und verschiedenen Deckkräften. Bin noch mal drüber. --Ralf Roleček 15:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

•  Support - Thank you for denoising. I feel like this photo is worthy of a feature now, partly because what's depicted is quite interesting, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Nice self portrait. ;-) --XRay ^talk 06:23, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:16, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places