Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jeanne d'Arc Joan of Arc at San Francisco's Palace of the Legion of Honor and crepuscular rays.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Jeanne d'Arc Joan of Arc at San Francisco's Palace of the Legion of Honor and crepuscular rays.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2009 at 04:48:18
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 04:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 04:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Downsampling, nothing sharp and we have better FP's already of crepuscular rays. Lycaon (talk) 10:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment With regards to downsampling - I think this is has been done the right way: full resolution version uploaded, then the 'improved' version over top. It is not as though the downsampled version was provided in an effort to retain a high res version for sale etc. People are then free to use the 'improved' version or the original. --Tony Wills (talk) 21:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comment, Tony. The only purpose of the downsampling was to reduce vignetting of the sky (Diti got it right) and downsampling did achieve the intentend results with no loosing any information in the process. It is hard to impossible to avoid vignetting while taking an image of the fog, as well as it all, but impossible to get sharpness in the fog.The mystic of the low fog, where nothing is sharp, where the shapes are disappearing, slowly dissolving in the fog until nothing, but the fog is seen, it is what makes the images beautiful. --Mbz1 (talk) 13:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Downsampling was obviously done to achieve a sharper version (loosing information in the process), but failed miserably at that. Lycaon (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comment, Tony. The only purpose of the downsampling was to reduce vignetting of the sky (Diti got it right) and downsampling did achieve the intentend results with no loosing any information in the process. It is hard to impossible to avoid vignetting while taking an image of the fog, as well as it all, but impossible to get sharpness in the fog.The mystic of the low fog, where nothing is sharp, where the shapes are disappearing, slowly dissolving in the fog until nothing, but the fog is seen, it is what makes the images beautiful. --Mbz1 (talk) 13:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- weak Support concerning sharpness I agree with Lycaon. But this time the mood and also the composition convince me. Though I would even suggest a tighter crop without the statue of Jeanne d'Arc. --AngMoKio (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- The image is not about crepuscular rays, and the image is not about the statue of Jeanne d'Arc. When I was photographing the scene, it felt somehow symbolic.Jeanne d'Arc points her sword to the heavens, and the heavens respond to her with the rays. It was absolutely beautiful. It was a man made statue and the rays that the sun painted over the low fog. I guess next time I need to ask the sun to do a better job and make the rays sharper. :) That's why I cannot cut out the statue. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support Atmosphere. --Lošmi (talk) 00:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Neutral A bit of vignetting, and I'm personally not a fan of the photo exposure (although I like the composition). →Diti the penguin — 00:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)- Support Conan (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Question could you explain the composition? It looks like to be a little bit difficult. Maybe cropping the picture on the sun, getting Joan of Arc out, would be better.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your question. The image is not about crepuscular rays, and the image is not about the statue of Jeanne d'Arc. When I was photographing the scene, it felt somehow symbolic.Jeanne d'Arc points her sword to the heavens, and the heavens respond to her with the rays. It was absolutely beautiful. It was a man made statue and the rays that the sun painted over the low fog. You could see the fog onle, when it lit by the sun, but there was fog everywhere there. I was standing in fog, as well as the statue was. That's why the shapes of everything looked rather mystic then sharp. I hope this answered your question why I cannot cut the statue out. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thx, now its cleare to me. Maybe you could offer this explanation in the picture description.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 08:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your question. The image is not about crepuscular rays, and the image is not about the statue of Jeanne d'Arc. When I was photographing the scene, it felt somehow symbolic.Jeanne d'Arc points her sword to the heavens, and the heavens respond to her with the rays. It was absolutely beautiful. It was a man made statue and the rays that the sun painted over the low fog. You could see the fog onle, when it lit by the sun, but there was fog everywhere there. I was standing in fog, as well as the statue was. That's why the shapes of everything looked rather mystic then sharp. I hope this answered your question why I cannot cut the statue out. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Neutral Very, very impressing, I'm just worried about the quality. —kallerna™ 14:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Karel (talk) 15:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 07:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support now, when I understand its commposition, I can support it.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 08:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support --staka.talk 02:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- Support Basik07 (talk) 12:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral => featured. --Karel (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
