Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Crosswalk of Market at Third, San Francisco.jpg

File:Crosswalk of Market at Third, San Francisco.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2017 at 22:38:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Crosswalk of Market at Third, San Francisco.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Crosswalk of Market at Third, San Francisco.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
•  Info created by dllu - uploaded by dllu - nominated by dllu -- dllu (t,c) 22:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- dllu (t,c) 22:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Absolutely YES! KennyOMG (talk) 22:49, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support lNeverCry 22:54, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose - I don't get what's featurable about this. It's a crosswalk with some lines in the street. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment I nominated this picture because, in my opinion, the strong diagonal lines gives a striking geometric quality to the iamge. dllu (t,c) 11:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Oppose Not exactly Shibuya crossing. The grey overcast weather and the lack of traffic or pedestrians mean this photo doesn't have the necessary spark or life. -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment I intentionally selected this image out of dozens to have less traffic. It is too visually cluttered to have this intersection full of random cars. dllu (t,c) 11:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support The shapes and lines make this image very appealing, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Great shapes and lines. The light gives the photo a gritty NYPD Blue feeling. Not all FPs need to be some manicured Technicolor version of Legoland. --cart-Talk 10:20, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

• Not my point at all. Gritty can be good, but it's very hard for the mundane to wow me. This doesn't look like New York to me, though: We haven't had any trolleys for decades (since the 1950s, I think - my parents remembered them but they didn't exist in my lifetime). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
• I think hisher point was more about the aesthetic of NYPD Blue rather than literally being in New York itself. dllu (t,c) 11:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

• That would be her point. But NYPD Blue was about New York, not San Francisco. As a New Yorker who's also spent a good deal of time in San Francisco, I'm probably too close to both objects to really be able to understand the broad scope of what she means. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:56, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

• Who's 'she', the cat's mother? Well, dllu you are absolutely right. I was talking about the feel of a city you get when you watch that TV-show. Ikan, you are taking things far too literary sometimes. I know that I should refrain from speaking metaphorically when describing the mood in photos, but sometimes it is what best describes the feeling I get for a pic. Have you ever been to a wine tasting Ikan? At such events they can speak of the the wine's "nutty flavor with earthy tones and a hint of licorice" to describe the taste of the wine even though there are no nuts, soil or licorice in the actual wine. Using films, songs and TV-series to describe moods in photos work along the same line. Also, please keep in mind that I'm Swedish, and even though I've been to both New York and San Francisco and know they are two very different cities, to me this photo (and NYPD Blue) simply looks "American". I'm sure you could make the same sort of generalization wrt Stockholm and Gothenburg, and simply see them as "Swedish" even if trams are more common in Gothenburg. --cart-Talk 13:02, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

• I haven't been to Sweden yet. But you basically said the same thing as I: I'm too close to the objects to see the panoramic view you see. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Indeed a very different take, one that made me stop and take notice when I was scrolling through new nominations. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment You have to give a reason for opposing. Is being different the reason for the oppose? dllu (t,c) 20:13, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Sorry ... I had meant to type support. Daniel Case (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Oppose Just a messy composition. Charles (talk) 11:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful photograph. WClarke 20:03, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support I don't why....but i like the composition,isn't messy for me --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 21:20, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Ralf Roleček 21:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Super interesting perspective and composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /lNeverCry 05:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places