Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vista de Seattle, Washington, Estados Unidos, 2017-09-02, DD 07-08 HDR.jpg

File:Vista de Seattle, Washington, Estados Unidos, 2017-09-02, DD 07-08 HDR.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2018 at 20:30:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Vista de Seattle, Washington, Estados Unidos, 2017-09-02, DD 07-08 HDR.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vista de Seattle, Washington, Estados Unidos, 2017-09-02, DD 07-08 HDR.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
•  Info Cityscape of Seattle seen from after sunset from 701 on 5th Avenue. All by me, Poco² 20:30, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco² 20:30, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
• Moderate  Support - A bit more noisy than the very best panorama pics, but I think that if this is the best quality you can get, it's sufficient, and the view is beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:23, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support HalfGig talk 01:41, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support I like night cityscapes. Just curious: Since Ikan Kekek pointed out noise, why not drop the ISO from 320 to 100 to reduce noise and make the exposure time longer to accentuate the car trails? For what it's worth, I don't think the noise is a big deal at all. Other minor technical issues include: mountain ridges on the left have a halo above them, probably due to using the "clarity" or "detail" slider in Lightroom; the logos of the Hilton and Sheraton hotels on the bottom right appear doubled (reflections on glass, perhaps?) dllu (t,c) 02:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

  dllu: That's what I would have probably done under normal conditions, using an ISO 100 but the shots from the oberservation deck until then had been blurry. As it was a bit windy I believe that the building kept moving, I didn't realize it but the camera did. That's why I shortened the exposure time. I have uploaded a new version adressing the other issues you mentioned Poco² 19:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:14, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment Quite noisy and a bit blurry in the details. --Granada (talk) 09:08, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:02, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:46, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose Was thinking the same as dllu (but it's an oppose, sorry ;) ). A bit dark for a 2018 night shot also. - Benh (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose Don't think this is quite FP level in terms of detail retained. -- Colin (talk) 08:54, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /PumpkinSky talk 23:40, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

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