Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:View from Imperia Tower Moscow 04-2014 img12.jpg

File:View from Imperia Tower Moscow 04-2014 img12.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 05:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:View from Imperia Tower Moscow 04-2014 img12.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:View from Imperia Tower Moscow 04-2014 img12.jpg

1022

977

743

543

2616

4651

What is this? -- Slaunger (talk) 15:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

I guess it is a decorative facade element, or an advertisement screen. It is surely not a photographic or postprocessing issue. --A.Savin 14:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

It appears to be "technical floors"[1], likely for HVAC, etc. It doesn't look like this in other pictures of the building on the internet. A moire problem from downsampling?? --Kbh3^rdtalk 15:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Moiré from downsampling was also my initial thought and the objective for asking. But A. Savin has explicitly stated it is not a processing artifact... -- Slaunger (talk) 15:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

In any cases the material used for this section is different than the rest of the bulding and don't reflect the sun light in the same way. See the structure near the top on this wireframe image or the lightened part on this artist view -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 16:56, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

From looking at different photos online, I'm almost certain that this is an LED panel of some sort that is displaying changing patterns. There is a slight bit of moiré going on, but the general appearance seems to be represented well and doesn't seem to be an artifact to me. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 09:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

•  Info created by A.Savin - uploaded by A.Savin - nominated by -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 05:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Proposed category : Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers

•  Support -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 05:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Jiel (talk) 11:32, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks for nominating. Yes, there is going to be FoP in Russia from October 1, yes it is also retroactive, and yes it does not require taking the photo from the street. --A.Savin 13:25, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Question There is a section (see annotation) in the middle, which looks "weird" to me (but not necessarily "wrong"). What is it? Is the image a crop or have you downsampled? -- Slaunger (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

  Hi. See note. I'm not sure. The only big modifications I did was the removal of some glass reflections. --A.Savin 14:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

  •  Support Thanks for the reply. It is good. Regarding FoP: Should we just pretend it is October 1 now? The sun does rise sooner as compared to my location, but I did not know you were days ahead:) -- Slaunger (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the FoP question, I had of course the option to wait with the uploading, but other views I took then were all general cityscapes and with this single one I didn't want to delay several months. Again, FoP is retroactive; even if the file was deleted, it had to be undeleted after 10-01. Regarding the nomination, I'm not the nominator and I would have waited of course; but there are few days left, so in the end it's just a hairsplitting. --A.Savin 15:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

•  Comment – The image description should identify the dominant subject (Mercury City Tower?), not just where it was taken from (Imperial Tower). Quality image of half a building. --Kbh3^rdtalk 14:59, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. --A.Savin 15:51, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

•  Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 20:35, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:35, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent, maybe the horizon in the middle is not a perfect illustration of the rule of thirds. But let's celebrate the new FoP in Russia ! (The strange thing annotated appears on many other pictures -see Google- of this skyscraper, there is no wrong manipulation or so).--Jebulon (talk) 20:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
• Weak  Oppose, at least for now, due to the bottom crop, it's too abrupt for my taste. The building has for sure FP potential, actually some pictures on the web are pretty amazing. Do you have a way to show more of it at the bottom? If not, why? Poco² 11:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

It was taken from a glazed visitor's deck; the lower part is not visible there. --A.Savin 16:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

That's too bad, the crop ruins it for me Poco² 09:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

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