Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Volcanes de lodo, Buzau, Rumanía, 2016-05-29, DD 28.jpg

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

File:Volcanes de lodo, Buzau, Rumanía, 2016-05-29, DD 28.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2016 at 22:57:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Berca Mud Volcanoes are a geological and botanical reservation located close to Berca in Buzău County, Romania.
  •  Question - Is it important for the viewer to understand the technical stuff like that? I didn't tell the audience who was listening to me play in the pit for the chamber opera (3 piece band + 4 singers) that I just finished a 2-week run of what model of flute I was playing or what fingerings I was using, nor did I explain to them the challenges of playing very soft in the midrange after not playing anything for several minutes, to take some of many examples. Poco could choose to sharpen the foreground in post-production, anyway - something I couldn't do in 10 live performances. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but it's easiest for me to look at the photo in full-page and full sizes only. I'm not suggesting downsampling, of course. I'm simply looking at the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:06, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you're using zoom-viewer. Clicking the "-" once, after fully zoomed will give us a decent view for larger images. Jee 06:15, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I usually use the zoom viewer only when I can't view photos normally (by clicking on them and looking at full-page size, then full size). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:42, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; these are the ways I too prefer for a review. Downloading bigger images is difficult from my limited Internet access. I know we've some professional reviewers who download and open the picture in special software to check everything. It is not my cup of tea, especially due to lack of resources. That's why I usually didn't review big panoramas. (May be a bit off topic from my side.) Jee 08:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • For a 50% (12.5MP) downsize see [1]. Perhaps Poco you could supply a downsized link of your 50MP images when you nominiate. A 12MP image such as this might be a more reasonable position to judge 100%. Ikan, this image at 100% on a 100dpi monitor is 2.2 metres wide and 1.5 metres tall and a recommended viewing distance of several metres rather than the ~50cm typical for a desk monitor. You are not "simply looking at the photograph" but doing the equivalent of examining it with a microscope. If one were to display this A4 (such as in a magazine or book) it would be 740dpi, which is 2-3 times the resolution required/possible for quality print or any "retina" display technology -- any "unsharpness" would be far below level that would be rendered in print. The fact that MediaWiki and browsers by default only offer screen size & 100% size is not really Poco's fault. We see supports for <12MP images here, including landscapes, so lets not penalise people for (a) having higher resolution cameras and (b) not heavily downsizing. -- Colin (talk) 08:53, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here's another example that might help. Alice has a 6MP camera and her photo is examined at 100% for sharpness/noise/CA. Bob has a 12MP camera and his photo is also examined at 100% on screen. His image is effectively magnified 1.4x making his flaws more obvious. Carol has a 24MP camera and her photo, when examined at 100%, is effectively magnified 2x compared to Alice's. It is twice as hard for Carol to get away with sharpness/noise/CA issues than Alice at FP if her image is compared at 100%. Dan's 36MP camera photos would be magnified 2.5x and Erin's 54MP camera photos magnified 3x. Frank's 96MP stitched photo would be effectively magnified 4x compared to a 6Mp photo of the same scene. (*Assumes all photos are 3x2 ratio). -- Colin (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I love how Colin take his time to make a excellent detailed explain --The Photographer 13:04, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I've uploaded a new version with some additional sharpening in the foreground. Regarding the discussion above I'd like to add that it is in fact not necessarily fair to compare 12 with 50 MP images, but still my objective is to provide a 100% quality image independently of the resolution and this camera actually can provide that quality, although under some circumstances it is not as easy as it was with my former 5D Mark II. Poco2 17:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /lNeverCry 08:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Volcanes_de_lodo,_Buzau,_Rumanía,_2016-05-29,_DD_28.jpg&oldid=226536210"