Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2015 at 00:09:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:House of Blackheads and St. Peter's Church Tower, Riga, Latvia - Diliff.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:House of Blackheads and St. Peter's Church Tower, Riga, Latvia - Diliff.jpg
Oppose One of problems of wanting "too much in one photo" which then destroy composition. In this case, i would leave church out, its not enligthed, would focus just on rigth part of those 2 bldngs. Bottom option doesnt seem good. I was in same doubt not long ago, better skip some part due to better composition, than to try to get all. Would better work if in dayligth, at least would be illuminated. --Mile (talk) 13:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really understand why the composition is destroyed though by using an off-centre composition. In this case, it shows the location of the building as it relates to the courtyard and the three dimensionality of it - a sense of its relationship that you don't get from a frontal view. Yes, this results in perspective leans of vertical lines but this is to be expected, and I don't think it is very extreme in this case. I also took this image of the building which is from a slightly different angle and does not include the church spire behind. Do you think this is better? It was taken 4 minutes later but you can see that in that time, the lighting changed a bit and it was darker. I specifically chose to photograph it illuminated at dusk because the building (House of Blackheads) stands out much better than during the day and contrasts nicely against the blue hour sky. Diliff (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thats one you mentioned definately works for me, should be first alternative. Actually i like off-centre, i hate all those centering and asking PD fine on 40-50 meters high tower, and especially mentioning PD at angle shot... its nonsense. Some are too much up the rules, and not know when is not so goood to obey them. Leaving that high church out, you get some more natural-looking PD correction. I didnt know it have some name-ambient conotation. Worth to rethink. --Mile (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mile, I have re-worked this version (uploaded over the original) to improve the distortion at the edges, and a slightly brighter exposure also. Do you still oppose this version? Diliff (talk) 11:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Martin, I did also take this frontal photo of House of Blackheads. It has less distortion but I didn't think the composition was as interesting. The other image shows the building in its surroundings better. Diliff (talk) 09:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm maxed out with two current nominations. If you think it should be nominated separately, someone else such as yourself would have to do it. ;-) Diliff (talk) 14:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 00:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Support -- Diliff (talk) 00:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Oppose One of problems of wanting "too much in one photo" which then destroy composition. In this case, i would leave church out, its not enligthed, would focus just on rigth part of those 2 bldngs. Bottom option doesnt seem good. I was in same doubt not long ago, better skip some part due to better composition, than to try to get all. Would better work if in dayligth, at least would be illuminated. --Mile (talk) 13:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Comment Thats one you mentioned definately works for me, should be first alternative. Actually i like off-centre, i hate all those centering and asking PD fine on 40-50 meters high tower, and especially mentioning PD at angle shot... its nonsense. Some are too much up the rules, and not know when is not so goood to obey them. Leaving that high church out, you get some more natural-looking PD correction. I didnt know it have some name-ambient conotation. Worth to rethink. --Mile (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
