Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:View from Park inn Berlin November 2013.jpg

File:View from Park inn Berlin November 2013.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2013 at 12:14:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:View from Park inn Berlin November 2013.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:View from Park inn Berlin November 2013.jpg

•  Info Berlin (primary Berlin-Mitte) seen from hotel Park inn at Alexanderplatz. Created, uploaded and and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support -- ArildV (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support St1995 22:47, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
• weak  Oppose Good afternoon / evening light (is the time correct?) and sky but I am not fully convinced. 1. the cropped rails at the front left are unfortunate 2. I am missings something eye-catching, all buildings are very flat, probably a more dense perspective (with a tele-lens) had been a better choice here. Especially the right half of the photo is from a photographic standpoint relatively boring 3. too much sky for my personal taste --Tuxyso (talk) 08:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Time is correct (sunset was 15:59, November 26)
  • The point of the photo is a high resolution images showing a huge part of Berlin-Mitte (a tele-lens had shown a much smaller part) in a very beautiful light. Some FP candidates have higher WOW but a little less EV, others have higher EV but a little less WOW (but still wow). My personal opinion is that this kind of very detailed city landscape has a high wow factor. Regards--ArildV (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Surely have very detailed city landscapes a wow potential. But if this had been your primary matter I had made use of panorama / stitching technique - no big deal with this motive. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 11:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment Slight ccw tilt Poco² 12:57, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
  •  Done Thanks.--ArildV (talk) 14:28, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
    •  Support Poco² 18:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment Arild, I don't like the almost centered horizon, I feel it doesn't work here, I think the rule of thirds might help in this case (by cropping a part of the sky). What do you think? There's also some slight CA which could be removed (I added two notes, remove them later). --Kadellar (talk) 16:19, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
  •  Done thank you. Much better now imo, CA also removed (sorry I forget to do it before I uploaded it).--ArildV (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
    •  Support Thanks for reworking. --Kadellar (talk) 11:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
• weak  Support I've changed my vote. With the new crop the photo is much better because the houses (although not very eye-catching and high) became more prominent. The evening light creates an intersting mood over the city. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:45, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Apart from some warm lighting and a road that leads the eye towards the middle, this photo IMO has nothing going for it.Fotoriety (talk) 23:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Michael Barera (talk) 05:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Lack of composition, structure or prominent objects of interest. It's a very good QI imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 11:47, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Halavar (talk) 00:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Fully agree with Julian Herzog -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:08, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --P e z i (talk) 21:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 17:14, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes