Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:AtardecerPlayaDoForte1-feb2016.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:AtardecerPlayaDoForte1-feb2016.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 22:09:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
Info all by me --Ezarateesteban 22:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC)- Weak Support - I like the composition a fair deal. However, to me, this photo looks a lot better at thumbnail and full-page size than it does at full size. At full size, the sky looks noisy. Perhaps you could improve the photo by denoising the sky somewhat. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks @Ikan Kekek: I tried to denoise a bit all the image, look if it is enough, furthermore I provide the original source file, so if you or another user wants to improve the image I'll be very greatful, I authorize, off course, to upload the improves over this image. Best Regards and thanks for your revision --Ezarateesteban 23:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- That's a substantial improvement, to my eyes, though others may be able to do more. Moderate support from me now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks @Ikan Kekek: I tried to denoise a bit all the image, look if it is enough, furthermore I provide the original source file, so if you or another user wants to improve the image I'll be very greatful, I authorize, off course, to upload the improves over this image. Best Regards and thanks for your revision --Ezarateesteban 23:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support I like the composition --The Photographer (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry. Composition is good. Some details missing and a lot of disturbing elements (waste). Sharpness may be better too. --XRay talk 10:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)- Oppose Nice composition but overprocessed (see posterization on bathing suit and clothing). Daniel Case (talk) 22:11, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
- Maybe a old look? --The Photographer (talk) 22:42, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
- Test version
I am trying to generate a new version cloning out the biggest piece of waste and trying to avoid the possible posterization, give me your opinions please and if it is enough I'll generate the jpeg file--Ezarateesteban 23:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Daniel. --Medium69 You wanted talk to me? 12:40, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:16, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
