Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg/2

File:Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2013 at 16:20:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg/2 Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panorama Hafen Cuxhaven Alte Liebe 2013.jpg/2

•  Info Re-nomination because previous nom had a lot of stitching-erros. The new version is hopefully free of this anoying (and time-consuming to fix) errors and I hope you will also support this new nomination
  created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 16:20, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 16:20, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support — Stas1995 (talk) 16:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --JLPC (talk) 18:02, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Julian H.^✈ (talk/files) 19:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Some minor stitching errors are still there, but nevertheless FP for me. --Ivar (talk) 19:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
  •  Done Thanks for the hint. I've corrected the two minor erros. IMHO such a harbour is the worst possible motive for a panoramic view because of the mass of ropes, and long horizontal elements :) The single photos were all hand-held, unfortunately I do not own a nodal-point adapter which had been the best hardware in the case here. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 21:16, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry. No "wow" factor to me. It is a panorama of a harbor. Nothing special. Even the light is not very pleasing. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 03:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I cannot change your "Wow perception" but imho the light is at this special daytime is quite good. If you take a look on this direct Suncalc link you can see that at the daytime of the photo all important parts of the harbour als well-lightened by the morning light. Take e.g. a look at the tower on the very right. Later at the day you have got the problem of contra-light situations. --Tuxyso (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
    • All important parts may be well-lightened. However, the cloudy sky makes the picture look boring to me. Besides I find the shadow on the left hand side disturbing. Overall, although it may have been difficult to stich the pictures together, the picture seems like an ordinary snapshot, escpecially if I compare it to the FPs you have taken so far. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 05:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
      • An interesting argument, but I think the term "snapshot" is misplaced here. If I take a photo I always think about the light and composition. You are right that this photo was a relatively spontaneous one. I took it before a boad trip to seal banks near the harbour of Cuxhaven. Spontaneous photos (not snapshots) are not bad per se - in contrary. A very special light situation, sky formation or motive is seldom planable. If I take a look on my FPs I would say that about 50% of them were spontaneous photos (with the meaning that I have not planned to photograph exactly that motive in that compositon). --Tuxyso (talk) 06:25, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose For me, the composition is too busy: a lot of elements without a clear arrangement. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:01, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
  • My main purpose was to take a very detailed and documentary photo of the harbour with good light. I had also wished Queen Mary in the harbour, but she was not there :) --Tuxyso (talk) 06:25, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
    • In my opinion you achieved that goal. However, that doesn't necessarily make it a FP. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 06:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
      • Let the Crowd decide :) Some users do obviously like this image and would like to see it as FP. Another user on QIC encouraged me to nominate this image. IMHO it is good enough for an FP, let's wait. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:00, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Technically it is very good, very sharp, great detail. But I agree with King of Hearts that the composition just isn't working. The right-hand-side isn't helping, with the white tower block "looking out of the picture". Suggest you try cropping to include just the left 9000px and see how you feel about that composition. I think that improves it, but still perhaps not enough to go wow. I feel for you Tuxyso, because this was not an easy feat and I've had my share of mixed-opinion FPCs. -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment enough wow for me (I've already pro-ed the image a few lines above) - especially considering the almost meticulous level of details in superb photographic quality! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support -- Felix König ✉ 11:04, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others. --Laitche (talk) 11:38, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Support I understand the oppose-votes but I will support for same reason as I did the first time.--ArildV (talk) 12:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose as the King of hearts --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose The composition doesn't work for me, no wow, sorry Poco² 07:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Good composition. Snowmanradio (talk) 08:56, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 14:55, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas