Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lago Plateado, Parque nacional y reserva Wrangell-San Elías, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 135.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Lago Plateado, Parque nacional y reserva Wrangell-San Elías, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 135.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2018 at 20:41:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Silver Lake during dusk, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Alaska, United States
  •  Comment Not so sure whether this is actually tilted. I've had the same problem in some of my landscape shots where the shaping of the shoreline looked like the image was tilted when it wasn't. Poco a poco will know :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion about tilt
  •  Support It is a lovely scene but there are problems with the angles. I don't think it is tilt (or not much) but more distortion towards the sides. A false horizon like we have here is not a useful guide. My understanding of the optics is that you should be able to draw a vertical line down from an element above the water and its reflection in the water and it will be aligned. Expect small variation with ripples and the reflection may be vertically longer or shorter depending on whether the element is vertical, tilted towards you or tilted away from you, but otherwise symmetrical because water is level and flat. The trees and reeds in the middle of the frame look close to vertical but as you go any distance to the left or right, they lean considerably. And even ignoring reflection, you can see it in the trees where they lean out of the frame. This might be because the camera wasn't held level, or because of lens distortion or if this is a stitch then projection distortions. I think it most probably the former, and then there's not much we can do other than send Poco back to Alaska. -- Colin (talk) 09:27, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  On hold This explanation is not valid to me. I studied optics at the university and think the problem is much more simple : there's a tilt of +0,7° just because the camera was leaning to the right. Not necessary to go back to Alaska and I wish Poco will understand and honestly fix that with good faith and good will. It's not a big mistake, it just gives a disturbing appearance. True the camera was also orientated top-down, creating the reciprocal inclination of the trees at both extremities, but this parameter has absolutely no influence on the aspect of the leaning horizon. Yes, this mirror line can be likened to a real horizon, because it's far enough from the observer, and straight like a ruler at 1:1. If this line was curved, due to important relief, then it would be different. But here it's tilted. I remember how long and exausting was this discussion Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:HDMY_Dannebrog_(A540)_2017-08-16.jpg before Colin finally understands the optics and fixes the issue in a similar situation, so I really hope we can avoid such endless debate this time -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:47, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I agree, there was a tilt, but I came to the conclusion that I achieved the best result overall tilting +0,3°. I have also improved the crop, reduced the noise and applied a vertical perspective correction to reduce the distortion on both sides. The result is a kind of compromise because, using always the stocks over the water and their reflexion as a reference that should be aligned, that didn't match 100% at the same time in the middle and on both sides. Applying +0,7° would increase the deviation in the middle too much, where I believe that it should be perfectly aligned (as it was in the previous version), but somehow guided to bigger deviations in one side versus the other. As said, I will not manage to get everything perfectly aligned without distorting the image with Photoshop, what I can do anyhow if that is the wish of the reviewers. That would be still easier than going back to Alaska :) --Poco2 11:19, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Basile, could you try hard to discuss issues with images without making personal attacks, otherwise you are just generating a list of reasons to block you. So are you claiming that a line through the mid-point of a reflection should be horizontal level? File:Vic-la-Gardiole, Hérault 14.jpg, File:Koettmannsdorf Unterschlossberg Stausee und Strassenbruecke 03032015 0234.jpg and File:Josselin Château Evening Light Reflected 2016-08-15 WLM.jpg suggest not. Or are you claiming the distant shore is close enough to perpendicular that it can be used like a horizon? Well I don't know how you can think that is a useful guide for small tilts because you have no way to know the angle of that shore. There is no horizon on this image. You cannot use any horizontal line here to determine the angle. The only line you can use to determine tilt is vertical reflection. This is also why, when making stitched photos, we use vertical control points, and can only use horizontal control points if the horizontal line is actually perpendicular to the camera angle-of-view. As Poco noted, a combination of vertical perspective correction and small tilt improved (but hasn't fully corrected) the problems, and the guide is vertical mirror lines. -- Colin (talk) 16:10, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik(talk) 07:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Lago_Plateado,_Parque_nacional_y_reserva_Wrangell-San_Elías,_Alaska,_Estados_Unidos,_2017-08-22,_DD_135.jpg&oldid=310609410"