Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Desierto de Dalí, Bolivia, 2016-02-02, DD 107.JPG

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

File:Desierto de Dalí, Bolivia, 2016-02-02, DD 107.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2016 at 13:36:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

:Changed to  Oppose due to the technical defects. Ping me if you reprocess it. -- Thennicke (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose overprocessed and per Sting. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    •  Comment There are zones where the colors are differents, you can see that it has natural colors --The Photographer (talk) 20:17, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Comment Lol. Sure, and I could oppose you this one, or that one (the closest to reality), or that other one, or even simply here on Commons (good colors too). Googling around for bad pictures and you will find as many different colors than photographers, some of them really weird. There's no way to get this cyan cast naturally on Earth, even less at an altitude above 4,500 m where you will have a deep blue sky, by the way with an excess of magenta in this Andine region. It happens I traveled very close to that area not long ago and none of the photographs I brought back (or any of the others photographers I traveled with) has that funny color for the sky. Sting (talk) 20:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        •  Question - Poco, do you have any comments about this? It doesn't look like a response from you is essential for this picture to be featured, but I'd be interested to get your take on these objections. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • Ikan: sorry for the late answer. I'm on my way to the WikiCon in Berlin right now. To my defense I can say that I haven't applied any special processing on this picture but would agree that there is a cyan touch that I could get rid of, no problem with that and no drama about it, either. It will not be though before Monday when I'm back home from Berlin. I would also be delighted to see some of Sting's works in Bolivia and get to know in which year season the pictures were taken. That would definitely help me to undestand his point. Poco2 16:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
            • Of course ;-) Mines were taken less than 1.5 months before yours. For all photos the camera setting was at “Neutral” and in AdobeRGB; all other settings to 0. I made a new revelation of the Raw files in Camera Raw specially for this purpose here, with all settings to 0, so, of course, all images will look dull with a big lack of contrast, but that's not the discussion here. In ACR the Camera profile was let at its default value “Adobe Standard”, instead changing it to “Camera Neutral” which would give a sky even less cyan and much more magenta. No processing applied in Photoshop, only resizing, converted (and not assigned) to sRGB, 8 bits and added text. Saved at jpeg max quality to avoid color distortions. All this to avoid as little change as possible of the Raw file and not be called a liar, I hope. The first one has the most cyan sky I could find, shot in the morning at 2.500 m, and even pushing the saturation to the max we're far from the cyan of the candidate here. The second one was taken in another place at about the same altitude, in the middle of the afternoon; no more cyan here even pushing the saturation. The last one was taken 55 km away from the candidate here (23° 04' S – 67° 28' W), at about the same altitude, during the second half of the afternoon; the sky has even a deeper blue. Hope this helps. Sting (talk) 21:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
              • Well, they are not the kind of picture I was actually expecting but thanks anyhow. I have still pictures from Chile yet to be uploaded that go in the same direction like the one from Valle de la Luna (the second one). The funny thing is that all of them have the same processing. Btw, if you are shooting raw I don't see how the neutral or any other such a setting could have an influence in the outcome. Regarding that cyan touch I will, as said, reduce it on Monday. Poco2 22:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
                • Wrt raw, the ACR camera profile can have a noticeable effect on colours. What what I've read, the "Adobe Standard" should be the most faithful setting as it's the one the Adobe engineers have calibrated to test charts. The other ones "Camera Standard", "Camera Neutral", "Camera Vivid" etc are all attempts by Adobe to simulate the processing that your Canon/Nikon/Sony does when creating JPGs and the various processing modes available in your camera. Generally the manufactures are less interested in neutrality, than making skin tones look healthy and holiday photos look great. But Poco is right that if you process the raw file, then the camera setting for AdobeRGB vs sRGB or Neutral/Standard/Vivid/etc should not matter at all. The only things those will affect are JPGs and thus the histogram in your camera display. Another variable is colour temperature/tint. Unless one photographs a test chart, then it is just a matter of opinion and judgement, rather than science. -- Colin (talk) 17:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Jiel (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Halavar (talk) 23:28, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Thennicke, Sting, and Alchemist-hp: new version uploaded with reduction of cyan tone Poco2 17:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Looks much more real now, thanks :) -- Thennicke (talk) 00:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Desierto_de_Dalí,_Bolivia,_2016-02-02,_DD_107.JPG&oldid=194684544"