Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:City Palace detail 01 - Berlin.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:City Palace detail 01 - Berlin.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 09:06:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created, uploaded and nominated by MrPanyGoff -- MrPanyGoff 09:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Support -- MrPanyGoff 09:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose A no-brainer QI. Excellent light and colors, very low noise, very educational, crisp and clear. But sorry, the wow is just not there for me. --Slaunger (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)- Support Yann (talk) 09:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose The harsh shadow is a "no go" for me; otherwise good quality. --A.Savin 16:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with A.Savin. Too much shadow on the left part of the object and a big dominating shadow on the left of the object. The light is not good. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't think complaining about the shadow is appropriate here. The light is very good, and with a strong side light which add relief to the sculpture, there needs to be a shadow on the side. Digitaly removing the shadow will certainly not improve the image. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- I do not think digitaly removing the shadow is good. Before taking the photo there should have been a lamp placed at left giving light in the left part of the photo. I know that would probably not have been possible for the photograher (a museum visitor I guess). --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- No, because it would remove the shadow on the sculpture, which would ruin the idea. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:02, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- Yann, I agree entirely with you regarding the lightning. The lightning is very good as it is. --Slaunger (talk) 20:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- Then you can simply support ;) --MrPanyGoff 20:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- I would, if the wow was there for me. My oppose is not on technical grounds:) --Slaunger (talk) 21:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
- Then you can simply support ;) --MrPanyGoff 20:58, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Yann, I agree entirely with you regarding the lightning. The lightning is very good as it is. --Slaunger (talk) 20:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- No, because it would remove the shadow on the sculpture, which would ruin the idea. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:02, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- I do not think digitaly removing the shadow is good. Before taking the photo there should have been a lamp placed at left giving light in the left part of the photo. I know that would probably not have been possible for the photograher (a museum visitor I guess). --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't think complaining about the shadow is appropriate here. The light is very good, and with a strong side light which add relief to the sculpture, there needs to be a shadow on the side. Digitaly removing the shadow will certainly not improve the image. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- I agree that an afterwards removal of the shadow wouldn't improve the image; a shadow is not necessarily an evil, but this one is simply too harsh for me, which is hardly avoidable with an object placed so close to the background. --A.Savin 21:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
