Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2013-09-19 14-30-57-collegiale-thann-PA00085696.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:2013-09-19 14-30-57-collegiale-thann-PA00085696.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 13:48:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures
Info created & uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 13:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 13:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)- Support Interesting motif, sharp at lower but still high resolution (12.7 megapixels). IMO marginally overexposed, though, as the details at the bottom are slightly too washed-out. Cmao20 (talk) 14:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Comment Agree that the brightness is too high (I appreciate some elements of the stonework have been cleaned and are brighter than others). Lacking embedded colour profile. -- Colin (talk) 15:40, 19 August 2019 (UTC)- Comment - Really gorgeous motif. I'll see if ComputerHotline addresses any of the comments above, as I'd like to be able to support this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Neutral, per above comments. Daniel Case (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Weak oppose Really a gorgeous motif, the composition is OK, but details should be sharper: the image is not as crisp as this motif deserves. Looks like the lens did not resolve details fine enough to take full advantage of the resolution of the sensor. --Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)- Aristeas please note this is a 64MP stitched panorama, composed of many frames taken by the camera. ComputerHotline has chosen not to downsize the result, whereas some others do. There is an impressive amount of detail captured here, even if the result looks a bit soft if you pixel-peep. The lens/sensor resolving concern should really be reserved for equipment reviews IMO. Per User:Colin/PixelPeeping the increasing resolution of sensors perversely means we are less satisfied with the results at 100% even though the actual overall image is better and more detailed. This image contains more detail than any normal 24MP camera could capture in a single frame even with a great lens. -- Colin (talk) 12:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- You are right, so I delete my vote. Sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 13:33, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Aristeas please note this is a 64MP stitched panorama, composed of many frames taken by the camera. ComputerHotline has chosen not to downsize the result, whereas some others do. There is an impressive amount of detail captured here, even if the result looks a bit soft if you pixel-peep. The lens/sensor resolving concern should really be reserved for equipment reviews IMO. Per User:Colin/PixelPeeping the increasing resolution of sensors perversely means we are less satisfied with the results at 100% even though the actual overall image is better and more detailed. This image contains more detail than any normal 24MP camera could capture in a single frame even with a great lens. -- Colin (talk) 12:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulphere 15:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Boothsift 22:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
