Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hackerbrücke Munich 2014 03.jpg

File:Hackerbrücke Munich 2014 03.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Feb 2017 at 13:15:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Hackerbrücke Munich 2014 03.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hackerbrücke Munich 2014 03.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
•  Info Picture from WLM 2015, c/u/n by me. — Julian H.^✈ 13:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support — Julian H.^✈ 13:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - Excellent picture, and I'm tempted to support it weakly at the moment, but it bugs me that the right crop cuts into a mast. I assume there's no way to add the remainder of the mast to the picture? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:31, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
  • There is a building that starts exactly at the current crop, in-between the tracks, unfortunately. Since that's basically black, it really ruins that edge. — Julian H.^✈ 14:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Julian, I uploaded a crop and nominated it as an alternative. I can't quite follow your explanation with the "ruined edge" and how you would feel about cropping. I can't see any problem with my crop (if you do, would you mind explaining it more?). Feel free to change my crop or remove the "Alternative" nomination below altogether if you have a better solution or you want to leave the image as it is. Sorry for creating the alternative without asking first, I really like the image. – Lucas^T 18:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support well done! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:06, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Milseburg (talk) 20:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Code (talk) 06:08, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Ralf Roleček 22:00, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Alternative, cropped on the right

•  Info Picture from WLM 2015, created by Julian Herzog, uploaded and nominated by Lucasbosch – Lucasbosch^T 17:40, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support I cropped this on the right per Ikan Kekek's suggestion. I like it better this way, too. – Lucas^T 17:40, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

• Lucas, although I was about to suggest this crop myself to Julian, it would have been more polite to let him do the crop himself and suggest an alt. We had this mess of well-meaning alterations of photos a while back and it quickly turned into quite a mess with numerous alternatives in the end. Please be a bit patitent and make suggestion to the nominator instead. This said, I  Support such a crop, but it would have felt better if it had been made by Julian. --cart-Talk 18:07, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

• cart, I'm sorry for jumping into action as quickly, I agree I should have waited a bit. I have pinged Julian above about my crop and what he meant in his reply. – Lucas^T 19:02, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

• That's fine, I do see the benefits of this version. I uploaded a file from the original over your upload to preserve the quality. — Julian H.^✈ 19:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support lNeverCry 19:08, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support--XRay ^talk 19:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support — Julian H.^✈ 19:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support also fine! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment, editing thoughts. Julian, I see a line of orange pixels at the top that looks like it doesn't belong there, you can find them by looking at the top most pixels. Also, are these blurred white spots in the sky OOF stars? If not, maybe clone these out as well. – Lucas^T 20:17, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks, I think I fixed those issues. The bright spots were probably flies lit by street lights, stars would have to be in focus. Not sure what was going on with the red line, it doesn't even show up in Lightroom, only in the export. — Julian H.^✈ 21:39, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Julian, I know you are concerned with quality: I have found visible JPG compression artifacts around roof antennas, see my note. – Lucas^T 22:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Those are not jpeg artifacts, that's just noise. Fixed though. — Julian H.^✈ 08:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support per Martin--Milseburg (talk) 20:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support this version. Daniel Case (talk) 21:43, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support - Still not perfect, as the extreme right side is notably glary, but that's a small detail and the photo as a whole is quite good and deserves a feature, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:40, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Thennicke (talk) 04:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Code (talk) 06:09, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:55, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Better one. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 22:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas^T 09:28, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

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

The chosen alternative is: File:Hackerbrücke Munich 2014 03 cropped.jpg