Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hong Kong Skyline Panorama - Dec 2008.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Hong Kong Skyline Panorama - Dec 2008.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Feb 2011 at 17:22:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Andyso -- Andyso (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Strong support -- Andyso (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Only users whose accounts are 10 or more days old can vote, please check rules. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- My account was opened in 2008. In addition, I am the nominator of this picture...so no kidding Andyso (talk) 05:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Info Your Commons account was created on the 5th February 2011. Please wait 5 days to vote (no kidding). Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Such ridiculous and stupid rules. Aint Wikipedia a part of the Commons? I am the nominator and cant even support my nominee.Andyso (talk) 14:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- According to this, my commons account has already been valid since Nov 2008. Andyso (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Such ridiculous and stupid rules. Aint Wikipedia a part of the Commons? I am the nominator and cant even support my nominee.Andyso (talk) 14:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- My account was opened in 2008. In addition, I am the nominator of this picture...so no kidding Andyso (talk) 05:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Only users whose accounts are 10 or more days old can vote, please check rules. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Support I'd boost contrast a bit (the dark parts are a bit too bright IMO), and it the sky may showcase same blending artifacts (or I need to change my glasses), but a clear support, and a huge technical challenge (not the size, but the fact the picture was taken at dusk, with decreasing light between the successive shots). - Benh (talk) 18:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Oppose quality issues (per Benh, looks somewhat pixelated imo), disturbing ghost ships on the sea, ccw tilt. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 22:15, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- I didn't mention it looks pixelated ;) about the CCW tilt, I had same feeling, but putting any vertical line against edge of the monitor shows that there isn't any tilt. - Benh (talk) 06:00, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- "Ghost ships" arent really big problems. This photo looks great indeed haha Andyso (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, but this is mitigated by circumstances. First, Hong Kong harbour is very busy. Second, this is made is long exposures shots, so this is hard to avoid. Third, this is taken at dusk, and therefore timing is very short. Usually, you can repeat a shot, so as to choose the one without disturbing elements, but not at dusk where you take the risk to have exposures inconsistencies because of the sun setting down. - Benh (talk) 14:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support--Jebulon (talk) 00:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Great picture! The "ghost ships" are a little bit disturbing indeed, but this is only a minor and unavoidable problem IMO. -- MJJR 14:39, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- Thomas888b (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support--Citron (talk) 20:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support baring the discovery of stitching flaws. -- IdLoveOne (talk) 05:46, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose per Benh and MJJR. W.S. 14:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- ??? Andyso (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- What W.S. means is that he or she is opposing the featuring of the image with the reasoning that Benh and MJJR gave in their comments above. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 05:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Exactly! How can you promote an image when you find it flawed. This is supposed to be the bees knees of commons W.S. 08:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- This is called mitigating circumstances. Sometimes, it's just very hard to make it better. I believe a hard to take picture with a few flaws is better than a perfect picture of an easy to take subject. Try to take similar pictures to find out. - Benh (talk) 12:26, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- Exactly! How can you promote an image when you find it flawed. This is supposed to be the bees knees of commons W.S. 08:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- What W.S. means is that he or she is opposing the featuring of the image with the reasoning that Benh and MJJR gave in their comments above. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 05:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- ??? Andyso (talk) 18:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support--Paris 16 (talk) 23:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 16:52, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Pretty, but the color and lighting seem very unnatural to me in a way that reduces educational quality. Whether it's exposure time, editing or what, I'm not sure, but it's clearly manipulated. Steven Walling 01:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose per Steven Walling--shizhao (talk) 12:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 20:57, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
