Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Faloria Cortina d'Ampezzo 15.jpg

File:Faloria Cortina d'Ampezzo 15.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2019 at 18:05:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Faloria Cortina d'Ampezzo 15.jpg: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Faloria Cortina d'Ampezzo 15.jpg:

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Belluno
•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by kallerna —kallerna (talk) 18:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Support —kallerna (talk) 18:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Of course this is an impressing landscape but I don't think that this shot is one of the finest landscape shots. The light is rather harsh and there are disturbing dark areas in the foreground. I'm not very pleased by the composition either. The trees in the foreground on the left are disturbing, the whole row of trees in the front line block the image from the viewer, there is nothing what guides him into the scene. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:18, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment - We've seen a lot of similar landscapes from Moroder. However, I find this composition very peaceful and would be inclined to support. That said, I'd prefer if you'd smooth out the sky just a bit. I feel this kind of view is proper to see at full resolution, and there are some subtle blotches and striations in the sky. Some of the trees in the middle background could have been a bit sharper, but that's not something that would affect my vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment What do you mean with smoothing the sky? —kallerna (talk) 18:49, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Eliminating the blotches and striations, in favor of hue/shade shifts without lines in between the hues/shades. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

• I can try to do that later today. —kallerna (talk) 04:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

• Some retouches made. —kallerna (talk) 19:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks. I'm still undecided, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

•  Support I like the picture very well and do not feel the shadows as annoying, on the contrary. The trees in the foreground give the picture a desirable depth. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 19:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too contrasted. Harsh light, dull colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose It's a nice alpine shot but for FP I'd like to see something more special - mostly light, actually. --Podzemnik (talk) 03:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Feminist (talk) 11:48, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

• Invalid vote. Account created today. Please read the guidelines: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote". -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

•  Weak oppose This is a pretty good picture, but the Moroder pics of this region have set a bar as high as Diliff's church interiors, and it doesn't get over that bar. It just seems too ordinary, and harshly lit. Daniel Case (talk) 23:01, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose sorry Kallerna but I'm inclined to agree with the above. Moroder's images are better when we're looking at alpine shots on Commons. This one is QI definitely, but I don't think the composition is that great. It's nice, but no more, considering the strong material available on Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 23:35, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment Moroders pictures? Is there a summertime picture of Cristallo mountain by Moroder? I really don't get your point. Featured by Moroder, has a midday sun, and the quality is also mediocre. Not saying it was not a good shot, I just mean that not every fp should be taken during sunset nor by specific individual. —kallerna (talk) 04:40, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

• Honestly, I don't think that picture is anything like as good as Moroder's current work. I would probably give it a 'weak support' today, because I like the composition but the light is fairly weak and the quality isn't perfect (note that it was promoted in 2014). He has better pictures in this genre, such as this or this. Ultimately my issue with your image is composition, not quality. The image quality is pretty great, however the composition just doesn't appeal to me; I feel like I'd prefer to see a wider panorama. I think it's your misfortune that you're competing in a genre where there's lots of existing very strong work. But of course not every FP should be taken by a specific individual, I have regularly supported your work before (e.g. this). Cmao20 (talk) 14:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

• Still, it's another place in another season. I get your point with wider panorama, thou IMO panoramas are never as good as individual frames. This one features wider point of view from the same mountain, and this is a real panorama from the same set. Anyways, thanks for the explanation. —kallerna (talk) 19:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

• For what it's worth, the second image you link to is FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 19:23, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

•  Support - This doesn't look like it'll pass, but after looking at this photo many times, I ultimately like the composition and the alternation of light and dark areas works for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose So sorry but per others --Boothsift 06:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:31, 15 October 2019 (UTC)