Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hochalppass Panorama .jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Hochalppass Panorama .jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2011 at 22:31:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 22:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- Böhringer (talk) 22:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support How can this not be supported? Great photo! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful picture. --Stryn (talk) 05:16, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Chmee2 (talk) 18:27, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Karelj (talk) 20:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
SupportBeautiful picture. Where's Wally? Can anyone else spot the one person in this picture? --99of9 (talk) 03:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Unfortunately I agree that it looks tilted. --99of9 (talk) 04:39, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Beautiful picture and reasonable quality, but yet another, similar looking mountain pano. W.S. 05:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Extremely dark mountain and background, very difficult to see details, entire image overall looks just a touch underexposed, crop feels constricting and it's a strange aspect ratio, and to be honest, the image really isn't all that impressive or interesting. I also somewhat agree with W.S., an above-treeline snow-filled pano does not an FP make. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 05:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support Yann (talk) 06:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support wunderbare Landschaftsfotografie, nicht nur Schalentiere und Gliederfüßler bilden eine Grundlage für exzellente Bilder, wie so manche glauben --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose I like composition and ambient but its just too dark. --Mile (talk) 11:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose lots of underexposed parts. Per others --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 11:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- the dark parts are only too dark if your monitor is not adjusted well, I can see everythink fine --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- It looks like iced charcoal, and my monitor is fine. This image is too dark, whether your monitor is fine or not. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 04:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose I have calibrated monitor, and the parts are still dark. I think it's overall (a bit) underexposed. The histogram looks a bit too balanced for a picture with snow. Per other opposers otherwise. - Benh (talk) 18:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Theklan (talk) 21:04, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support Tomer T (talk) 11:36, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support--Vibhijain (talk) 12:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Per the triumvirate of FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 14:29, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Not only I find it much too dark too, I also see a strong tilt - look at the clouds to the left. -- H005 20:16, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry Böhringer, you have many interesting panoramas, but this is not as good as others. maybe it could be improved in Photoshop or by restitching. ■ MMXX talk 08:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Support darkness is appropriate. the arrangement of light and dark areas is very natural. the valley has lots of shadows, yet one can even see the shapes of the fir trees. a polarizing filter was used to darken the skies - the top of the Großer Widderstein was affected by this as well. one could easily lighten this area and slightly increase global contrast - neglectable if considering the overall quality of this images. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 09:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I wouldn't be so sure a polarizer was used. On a 180° pano, you normally see the unevenness yield by a polarizer ; unless the picture is taken when the sun is at zenith, which is normally not the case here at time generation of EXIF. I also never seen that polarizer affected this much rocks (top of roßer Widderstein). - Benh (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- I do not have a polarizing filter --Böhringer (talk) 12:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- OK. What else did you do to darken the sky? Digital enhancement? Another technical gadget? Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 10:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- What makes you so sure something was done to it? I rather believe it simply hasn't been exposed long enough to have a medium-bright blue. Look at the snow, it should be somewhat white on a sunny day like this, but it is grey. The dynamic range of the scenery is very wide, difficult to catch without good and balanced postprocessing from the RAWs. -- H005 10:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- This effect looks rather unnatural to my eyes. Vignetting might be another answer to the question - yet I don't believe this is a realistic depiction of the sky. As for the colour of snow: ever thought of the clouds and their soft shadows? Luckily we don't need to theorize, Böringer is here to answer our questions (is he?).
- Question 1: What's the reason for the dark skies?
- Question 2: Did clouds cast their shadows on the snow (explaining the greyish snow tone)?
- Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 14:30, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- What makes you so sure something was done to it? I rather believe it simply hasn't been exposed long enough to have a medium-bright blue. Look at the snow, it should be somewhat white on a sunny day like this, but it is grey. The dynamic range of the scenery is very wide, difficult to catch without good and balanced postprocessing from the RAWs. -- H005 10:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- OK. What else did you do to darken the sky? Digital enhancement? Another technical gadget? Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 10:22, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- mein englisch beschränkt sich auf Google translate :-) Vielleicht hilft dieses Bild weiter. (Exif) Die selbe Einstellung und Uhrzeit. Bitte beachten sie, das dies der mittlere Teil des oberen Panorama ist und dieser auch ideal ausgleuchtet war. Zudem ist das Bild im Querformat.: --Böhringer (talk) 20:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- Ah, sprich das doch. Kein Problem, dann schreibe ich gerne noch mal auf Deutsch, um was es hier geht. Es gibt mehrere Kritikpunkte an deinem Bild von Seiten der User: Verzerrung des gesamten Bildes, nur ein Panorama unter Vielen, allgemein zu dunkel, unterbelichtet, Schnee ist zu Grau, Himmel und Spitze des Großen Widdersteins ist zu dunkel (stimme ich zu). Die Fragen die offen sind, sind folgende: Warum ist der obere Teil des Himmels so dunkel? Ist der Schnee deswegen so grau, weil die Wolken einen Schatten geworfen haben, oder hat das andere Gründe? Welche Ausrüstung wurde genutzt um das Bild zu machen? Welche Bearbeitungen wurden durchgeführt? Beste Grüße nach Österreich und regards, PETER WEIS TALK 22:18, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- I do not have a polarizing filter --Böhringer (talk) 12:25, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- die Fragen habe ich soweit schon verstanden. Dazu habe ich das Bild nebenan hochgealden. Dort sieht man in den exif Daten die Einstellungen der Panoramabilder. Es gab bis auf das Zusammennähen mit PTGui keine weitere Bearbeitung. Dass die Schatten im Schneefeld von den Wolken stammen, sieht man ja im Bild selbst. Warum der Himmel oben so dunkel ist weiss ich nicht. Vermutlich habe ich zu viele Bilder oder eine zu grosse Überlappung beim Erstellen des Pano gehabt. Eine Verzerrung links in den Wolken kann ich beim besten Willen nicht sehen. Für mich gibt es keine geraden oder schiefen Wolken ?!? --Böhringer (talk) 10:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
- Den Kritikpunkt "Verzerrung des gesamten Bildes" kann ich so auch nicht finden in den Kommentaren, ist meine Anmerkung "I also see a strong tilt - look at the clouds to the left" gemeint? "Tilt" ist aber keine Verzerrung, sondern eine Schiefe. Und der linke Teil des Bildes sieht mir sehr schief aus. (Anders als das Detailbild rechts - das ist gerade!) -- H005 13:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
- diese und andere Ansichten nehme ich als gegeben an, da werde ich nichts ändern können. Trotzdem danke ich für die rege Anteilname an der Bildbewertung. --Böhringer (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)