Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cañón Miles, Yukón, Canadá, 2017-08-26, DD 130-132 PAN.jpg

File:Cañón Miles, Yukón, Canadá, 2017-08-26, DD 130-132 PAN.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2018 at 21:30:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Cañón Miles, Yukón, Canadá, 2017-08-26, DD 130-132 PAN.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cañón Miles, Yukón, Canadá, 2017-08-26, DD 130-132 PAN.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
•  Info View of the Yukon River at Schwatka Lake and the entry to Miles Canyon, not far from Whitehorse, Yukon, Canada. The Miles Canyon is a featured location for its volcanic basalt formations. All by me, Poco² 21:30, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco² 21:30, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:23, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment Nice but it looks overprocessed -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:40, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

  Thanks for you feedback, Basile. I have developed this image the way I develop all others, no special settings here. To me it doesn't look bad either. Can you me a bit more precise about "overprocessed"? Poco² 07:39, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• The whole aspect looks a bit strange and artificial, as if the lighting, the colors and the contrasts had been excessively altered from the original version. Maybe you've been too far with the settings this time, like in this previous nom Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Ayuntamiento,_Trieste,_Italia,_2017-04-15,_DD_10.jpg. The result seems less natural than invented. Add a blue rabbit in this place and it would blend in with its environment :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:24, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Sorry, I don't get your point, I've reduced the highlights and the overall exposition but I cannot see that ideal environment for a blue rabbit you talk about. I'd to hear some other takes on this. The image you linked is a whole different animal, I reduced the exposure of the sky to make it more dramatic, nothing like that has been done here. It's just the developing settings I've used in thousends of images. Poco² 14:04, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Looking at this shot taken 1 minute later, the original contrasts suggest that the lighting conditions were not so cooperative, though -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:16, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Basile: the only one thing I can think of that could may look this picture strange is the WB, I think that it was indeed a bit off (too warm). New version uploaded, does it look now more natural to you? Poco² 18:04, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Yes I see an improvement, thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment The cut-off framing trees aren't helping, especially the one on the left. Perhaps more or less? Charles (talk) 09:45, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

  Charles, the trees are gone Poco² 14:04, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

•  Support VANDAL! Charles (talk) 14:11, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support - I have mixed feelings about cloning out things that are there, especially things that are relatively permanent, but it did make this a better, more restful composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:13, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support; it looks better now. Daniel Case (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 19:31, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful scenery -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:43, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- P999 (talk) 15:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tozina (talk) 20:46, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:43, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

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