Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vatican StPaul Statue.jpg

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

Image:Vatican StPaul Statue.jpg - featured[edit]

->The composition is meant to be like that. I placed St Pauls head 1/3 from the left border and Jesus unsharp in the background, representing somehow a constant presence. Well that it is cut in half is also part of the composition as i wanted to focus the view on the face. Also the clouds are important as they make the photo somehow more heavenly..you see i had many thoughts about that photo, btw i am not that religious as you might think now :-) --AngMoKio 09:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can you explain that please?--AngMoKio 13:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, just an awful pun . . . vatican, vatican't - MPF 20:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - composition Lycaon 07:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose ack lycaon.--Fanghong 03:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment, do you happen to have a picture of the same subject but with a different composition? maybe one where the statue is complete. I believe that would hit better with the crowds, as the main reason for opposition is a weird composition. I'd certainly support a "body shot" of the statue; like most people here I feel the composition is a bit weird.--Roadmr 00:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - it works for me, the focus is on the statue's eyes and the hand which bid the visitors to come closer and confess their sins;)the sky and the background underline the contrast between tiny people and huge statues just as it is was intended by the designers of the church and the square --eirissa 17:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support What the hell heaven?! It's near perfect. Composition is not good, but excelent. It seems like that hippy with the cross on the right were alive and blessing that Gandalf!!! And I must say that I'm a kind of those whose thinks that the only church that illuminates is that one which burns, so I'm not easily excited with religious subjects. Francisco M. Marzoa 00:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support ack Francisco M. Marzoa and the cloud is a good diagonal line through the picture Simonizer 09:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose With the subject that can be taken millions of times, lighting can be improved much more than this. Lighting is too strong and creates harsh shadow. Indon 08:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hope your monitor is calibrated. In my oppinion the contrast is not harsh at all. The light is also good and a cloud like that you dont have all the time --AngMoKio 12:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My monitor is well-calibrated, don't worry. And it is not the contrast that is harsh, but the shadow. The contrast is quite okay - I hope you understand the difference between contrast and lighting. Lighting is too strong as it was taken in a day light, the most uninteresting moment to take a picture. Look at the face, you'll see harsh shadow. Cloud? It's a dull textureless cloud, and sure you can wait for more interesting cloud. Indon 15:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
8 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 07:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Vatican_StPaul_Statue.jpg&oldid=12010510"