Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Poertschach Werzerpromenade 10 Woerther See Stockentenpaar 15032016 0943.jpg

File:Poertschach Werzerpromenade 10 Woerther See Stockentenpaar 15032016 0943.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2016 at 04:19:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Poertschach Werzerpromenade 10 Woerther See Stockentenpaar 15032016 0943.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Poertschach Werzerpromenade 10 Woerther See Stockentenpaar 15032016 0943.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
•  Info created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Johann Jaritz -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support INeverCry (talk) 04:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Neutral - This is a pretty picture, but it's so gray, and I find that the low light hinders the movement of my eye around the picture frame to some degree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
  •  Done Thanks, Ikan, for your constructive comment. I moved some sliders of LR, I diminuished the dominant harsh gray mood and gave the image a warmer touch, more towards orange. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:52, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
    •  Question - The picture is greatly improved now (with the possible exception of the snow-capped mountains now being less distinguishable from the sky), but do you think the current version is truer to how the view actually looked? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
      •  Comment The previous version it truer with the gray parts. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
• {{neutral}} Sorry, but I miss some wow. --Hubertl 08:12, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support I needed some time, it´s featurable for me... --Hubertl 12:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment De gustibus non disputandum. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose like Hubertl I miss the wow, also for me the horizon is unfortunately placed, and the closer duck is too close to the edge of the photo. -- Rftblr (talk) 12:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support what a sky!! funny ducks Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 07:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Ralf Roleček 00:39, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Fine reflections, wonderful atmosphere, ducks work here. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 11:41, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
•  OpposeThis edited version is unnatural, the first version I would have supported.--anghy (talk) 16:30, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
•  weak oppose Lovely subtle tones, and I can see what you must have been thinking. But while it's definitely a QI, it's not special enough to me for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 17:19, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support--Christof46 (talk) 20:27, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose I would have supported the more natural rendition. A picture should not have to be made unnatural in order to become a FP. -- Ram-Man 21:29, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Lošmi (talk) 20:49, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose The good quality of the photo at 36MP is impressive. However, I prefer the more natural colors. --Pine^✉ 06:27, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 11:51, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

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