Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg

File:Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2015 at 10:57:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications
•  Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Wow as a panorama, but the shadow at left is a little disturbing. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:28, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Very good, stricking at low and at full resolution. -- Christian Ferrer 11:34, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Nice. --Laitche (talk) 12:51, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Nice and very good --LivioAndronico talk 15:59, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Neutral - When I try to access the file using an older computer, Chrome explains that it will not load the file. Firefox takes ages to try to load the file before it gives up. I can load the picture on a new iPad, but it takes ages (and the browser crashed while I wrote this). The picture sure looks nice (nice composition, plenty of wow, fine technical quality), but I think FP's should be fairly easy accessible. --Pugilist (talk) 19:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment Mmh, I cannot really follow your argument, Pugilist. Commons is a media archive and should provide photos in the best possible quality. You can access a downscaled version via the image description page. You can also let the wiki software do the work:

• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg/1024px-Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg
• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg/2048px-Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg
• https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg/4096px-Schloss-Oberhausen-Innenhof-Pano-2015.jpg

--Tuxyso (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

• Normally, I'd recommend the JavaScript or Flash zoom viewers but they seem to be broken at present (for me, anyway). I don't think it is reasonable to expect a browser to display an image that would be 5.4m wide at 100dpi. It is a lousy way to view such an image. The zoom viewers provide a better experience. Please don't judge our images on the limitations of MediaWiki or your decision to use a web browser to review the 100% image. You wouldn't use a web browser to read a book. MediaWiki has a self-imposed restriction on its ability to downsize, but 7000px wide version. -- Colin (talk) 20:58, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

•  Support -- Colin (talk) 20:58, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Kikos (talk) 04:33, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 09:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment The very wide angle of view leads to extreme distortions when the image is viewed as a whole. The small stairs coming from the left and right at the bottom of the frame look like they would meet at a right angle at the place the camera was standing. From GoogleEarth I can see that they actually are one straight line. This is of course perfectly normal for shots like this, but can be misleading for people unfamiliar with wide panoramas. Hence, I'd like to suggest to enhance the description a little bit to read High resolution XXX° panorama of … to make that more clear (with XXX° being something around 180°, I guess?). Apart from that,  Support of course. --El Grafo (talk) 09:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks, El Grafo, for the useful hint. I've added some information regarding the shooting position and explanation for the curvature of the stairs in the foreground. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay ^talk 19:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Its tilted to rigth, could saw that in thumb, on the other hand, stairs bellow are tilting to left. --Mile (talk) 19:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Mile, I do not really understand your comment. I see absolutely no tilt - neither vertically not horizontally.  Question Have you read the image description? The different direction of the stairs I am standing on is a result of the projection (cylindrical). Please add a note to the image if you have still concerns. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:04, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
    •  Info check the line bellow the clock. No matter what projection is, you are positioned in centre as far i see, so shouldt be tilted in any case. On other hand, i wont oppose since lot of work and result isnt bad with minor mistake. --Mile (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
      •  Support I have to agree with Mile in their observation. It appears to be a local geometrical distortion in the clock region. Does Hugin have the possibility to add horizontal control points? That is how I would control that myself (using PTGui). If you are a real perfectionist you will probably fix that. On the other hand, it is really a minor detail (I did not spot it myself after scrutiny until I read Miles comment), and overall it is a splendid piece of work. It is clear for me that you have been very careful in the entire process from the capture to the processing. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
        • It took me very long to figure out if it is improvable by horizontal control points. It is, but only one horizontal line at the area around the clock is vertical in real. The difference is, according to Slaunger, subtle because only one line at the area around the clock is really straight. I will upload a new version tomorrow (already too late at least in Germany). --Tuxyso (talk) 22:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment I guess it's a 270°+ panorama, Am I wrong? --Laitche (talk) 08:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 09:28, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I missed the camera location. --Laitche (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- -donald- (talk) 09:27, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:54, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Results already posted. — Julian H.^✈ 15:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer 06:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications