Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Augustusburg, Western Facade, November 2017.jpg

File:Schloss Augustusburg, Western Facade, November 2017.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2017 at 20:25:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Augustusburg, Western Facade, November 2017.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Augustusburg, Western Facade, November 2017.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Germany
•  Info The western facade of Schloss Augustusburg. The Augustusburg and Falkenlust Palaces form a historical building complex in Brühl, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, which has been listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1984. All by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment As said in QIC, I think the sides are leaning out a bit. Small correction should be possible.--Peulle (talk) 21:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

• Fixed, Peulle --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

 Support--Peulle (talk) 14:37, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:05, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:29, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support - Very well done, excellent light. Was that done with a single photo or focus-stacked? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Just a single shot... uwa and stopping down results in sufficient dof, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

• Pardon my ignorance, but what does uwa stand for? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:02, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

ultra wide angle :-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Support - Looks inviting.--Ermell (talk) 07:51, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Stark. --cart-Talk 10:03, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry, too soft (see grass) --A.Savin 13:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment Thanks, Alexander. I've - very carefully - sharpened the image a tiny bit. It should be better now, although I couldn't recognize much of an issue here before... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

• It's probably lost, but you can send me the CR2 if you want. --A.Savin 15:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Support Good Composition --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 22:55, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose  Support The symetry that is almost but not quite too much. But the over-processed grass is just sad. --RaboKarbakian (talk) 00:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC) --RaboKarbakian (talk) 01:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Bottom piece cut maybe.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:14, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Info Peulle, Tomascastelazo, Johann Jaritz, Ikan Kekek, Ermell, cart, A.Savin, LivioAndronico, RaboKarbakian, Daniel Case: Following Famberhorst's advice, I've cropped the lower part of the lawn. This - imo - significantly improved the image as I got rid of ugly grass patches and could create a more pleasant side ratio. If you disagree I'll revert of course. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - I didn't mind the grass patches, and to me, this is a slight improvement, but I think people could disagree about that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I have no problem with it.--Peulle (talk) 11:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:31, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose It looks overprocessed, especially the grass, but also the building --Llez (talk) 21:52, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support HalfGig talk 02:17, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose An unfavorable time for taking a FP. The construction fences are very disturbing.--Milseburg (talk) 11:09, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Llez and Milseburg. --kaʁstn Dis/Cat 22:05, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Info Sorry for bothering you again, Peulle, Tomascastelazo, Johann Jaritz, Ikan Kekek, Ermell, cart, A.Savin, LivioAndronico, RaboKarbakian, Daniel Case, Famberhorst, Llez, HalfGig, Milseburg, kaʁstn: In order to address some of the issues mentioned above, such as the overprocessing of parts of the image, I've redeveloped the raw from scratch. The pic should be smoother now. Aside from that the image is pretty much as it was before, except that it's a bit wider, underlining its panoramic character. Thanks! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 00:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment Really no idea what exactly are you doing with the raw data, but the sharpness level isn't any better than previously. My offer with the raw file is still standing. --A.Savin 00:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - I preferred the previous version marginally, but not enough to change my vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:45, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others opponets. --Karelj (talk) 22:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 06:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Germany