Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:205 - Vallée de Colca - Panorama - Juin 2010 - 10.jpg

File:205 - Vallée de Colca - Panorama - Juin 2010 - 10.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2010 at 19:01:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:205 - Vallée de Colca - Panorama - Juin 2010 - 10.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:205 - Vallée de Colca - Panorama - Juin 2010 - 10.jpg

•  Info All by S23678 -- S23678 (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Due to the large size of the picture (330 Mpx), and the file size limitation (100 MB), the original image (250 MB and 330 Mpx) was uploaded as a mosaic of 6 pictures. The current FPC is a lower quality version of the original image (99 MB and 330 Mpx). As well, a downsampled version is available (91 MB and 100 Mpx). All versions are visible in the file description. Downsamples of this image is available here (10000X - 1000X - 100X and 25X downsamples). --S23678 (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- S23678 (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Strong support Spectacular panorama. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:41, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Info please consider asking others to upload such high resolution images which have advanced rights. village pump and user:Multichill could be the answer to this question. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 20:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral Very heavy file indeed. But astonishing picture with excellent sharpness. Congratulations with the technical tour de force! Unfortunately, the colors (especially the blue) are too saturated. -- MJJR (talk) 22:52, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
• {{o}} Sorry, unnatural colors, blues oversaturated, the blues seems violets --Miguel Bugallo 01:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral I'm not sure, I don't like the image, but it's very good--Miguel Bugallo 01:25, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Can we get a version that's only 10mb or so? My internet connection isn't that fast and I think that size is sufficient for most of what this image will be used for. --Calibas (talk) 19:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
  • here --S23678 (talk) 19:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral I so wanted to support, but I think I agree that the blue channel is too strong. How were the temperature and colours processed? --99of9 (talk) 22:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
  • A blend of 3 expositions was done manually, then levels and curve were adjusted. I did not played independently with the channels. --S23678 (talk) 19:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
    •  Support Ok. There could still have been an error in the original colour temperatures, but I don't know enough about this area to know for sure. It's certainly a Tour de force and very interesting to look at in detail. --99of9 (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Breathtaking picture. mgeo talk 09:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Strong support This is a very great and sharp work. Look inside, you will love it. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)