Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sunrise at viru bog.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Sunrise at viru bog.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2013 at 08:50:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by Abrget47j -- Abrget47j 08:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support -- Abrget47j 08:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support
Neutral Look non natural, excesive noise reduction and too color vibration. Excellent composition --The Photographer (talk) 16:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)Could be nice see EXIF data and geolocalization. --The Photographer (talk) 13:52, 16 December 2013 (UTC) - Comment Actually there is no noise reduction applied. Low contrast due to morning mist and vibrant colors because of sunrise. -- Abrget47j
- Support Very beautiful. And the unsharpness is not that bad and entirely forgivable given the 45 MP. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support --JLPC (talk) 09:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support Kruusamägi (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support Halavar (talk) 21:56, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment -- Yes, it is a beutiful composition and colors are really nice, as many other photos of this author. Still there seems to be something wrong technically as if the unsharpness and lack of detail were the result of some wrong exposure solution or poor gear (very high ISO, extreme HDR, poor lens ?) or even a posteriori manipulation. Or is it just the aethestic choice of the photographer? I know from my own experience that images taken with a D800 are usually very sharp. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:28, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Exposure is excellent, histogram proves it. My lens is first class. Have you ever captured photos in mist or fog? Or at sunrise? Where do you get the idea that it is captured with d800? It doesn't matter if you are usin D80, D800 d4 or Hasselblad, in fog you can't make sharp photos. You look too much at the numbers not at the photo itself. My photos are interesting and you don't seem to like it. But I thank you for your attention.--Abrget47j (talk) 09:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Please address the photo only and abstain from making comments about the reviewers' methods and likings. No numbes (Exif) in this photo to analyze. Please allow me to disagree in that the fog is the main cause for the softness of the image. I would bet for an agressive denoising process in trying to compensate for a high ISO noise. But that is only a guess. As I already suggested elsewhere, it is not a sound practise to underevaluate the competence of the reviewers here, especially when we know little about them. The talent of new users is much welcome here, preferably together with some modesty... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I added EXIF data, specially for you. ISO is 200, so no chance for "high ISO noise". For D800, it is nothing, as you may know. I have no intentions to be modest. I am straightforward and will be in the future.--Abrget47j (talk) 12:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Please address the photo only and abstain from making comments about the reviewers' methods and likings. No numbes (Exif) in this photo to analyze. Please allow me to disagree in that the fog is the main cause for the softness of the image. I would bet for an agressive denoising process in trying to compensate for a high ISO noise. But that is only a guess. As I already suggested elsewhere, it is not a sound practise to underevaluate the competence of the reviewers here, especially when we know little about them. The talent of new users is much welcome here, preferably together with some modesty... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Exposure is excellent, histogram proves it. My lens is first class. Have you ever captured photos in mist or fog? Or at sunrise? Where do you get the idea that it is captured with d800? It doesn't matter if you are usin D80, D800 d4 or Hasselblad, in fog you can't make sharp photos. You look too much at the numbers not at the photo itself. My photos are interesting and you don't seem to like it. But I thank you for your attention.--Abrget47j (talk) 09:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support St1995 22:22, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 07:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 11:22, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Too blurred in full resolution IMO. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 20:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Unsharp at full resolution. IMO because of small aperture F/18, F/10 would have been better and would have given an image much more sharp if of course it was your intention to make a sharp image. However at low resolution, it's a nice image. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:43, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Again, you can't capture a sharp image in mist. Believe me, even the foreground is affected by mist. Yes, the fog is not so deep and you see it only at distance but it's there also in the foregrund. I used different apertures this day and this one is the best. I use Nikkor 24-70 mm f2.8 lense and it is sharp at f18! Slow shutter speed is not an issue here because I have great tripod. Don't be afraid of small aperture. It might create nice colors and nice light effect. --Abrget47j (talk) 09:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support very nice pic! (geocoding would be appreciated) --P e z i (talk) 13:15, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Support Michael Barera (talk) 05:40, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 20:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural