Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porta Nigra morgens.jpg

File:Porta Nigra morgens.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2022 at 08:05:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Porta Nigra morgens.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Porta Nigra morgens.jpg

1350

1266

18312

10842

20000

13500

crop suggestion --Kreuzschnabel 08:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
•  Info 270 megapixel stitching of UNESCO World Heritage Site Porta Nigra at Trier, Germany. All by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 08:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- Wolf im Wald 08:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment Impressive detail of course. Two issues I don’t like too much: 1. Sharpening. Looks slightly oversharpened to me, there is a tiny sharpening edge visible against the sky (at the resolution given, this is top-level complaining of course). The image should not need that much sharpening. 2. The dominating foreground shadow, blocking the viewer from the building somehow. I’d prefer most of that cut off. --Kreuzschnabel 08:30, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment I don't really like the shadow either. But the location is quite difficult. There are only a few days of the year when the north facade of the building is illuminated by the sun early in the morning. As you can see, the picture was taken on June 19th., one of the longest days of the year. Unfortunately, you have to choose between the shadow and a bad light (too lateral). I didn't cut off the shadow any further because then I would have to cut off the sky as well and I don't think that would look so good. I think the building needs its space! ;-) -- Wolf im Wald 08:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
    • We’re entering into matters of taste here. Yes, it needs space, and with the shadow part, I get an impression of space being taken from the frame instead of granting more of it. The building is somewhat crammed between two large unicoloured areas – foreground and sky. A crop as suggested might even free it. --Kreuzschnabel 08:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
      • I see what you mean and thank you for the suggestion above. I tried this out in Photoshop and I have to say that I like it better with more shadow. But you're right, it's probably a matter of taste! I just don't like the main subject (almost) hitting the bottom edge of the picture. I'm curious what others think about it. -- Wolf im Wald 08:58, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
      • How about brightening the shadow then? and not only the street part, I think the whole pic would benefit from some toned down contrast (just my 2 cts). - Benh (talk) 08:59, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
        • Because no one has voted here yet, I just uploaded a new version with a little lighter shadow. It was important to me not to falsify the original lighting mood too much, so I only brightened it up slightly. Thanks for your feedback! -- Wolf im Wald 09:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Am I the only one who likes the shadow that produces such a contrast with the lighted gate? I'm reminded somewhat of the monumental paintings of De Chirico with long shadows. The shadow helps provide this photo of a Roman monument with a sense of monumentality. This is also a huge and impressively sharp photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Incredibly detailed and pin-sharp. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent.--Ermell (talk) 20:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- IamMM (talk) 05:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 06:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Ivar (talk) 09:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Lupe (talk) 19:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Huge resolution, interesting architecture, and the light on the building is pleasant. Still agree that de shadow on the ground is unsuccessful, but overall the illuminated parts are dominant -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:03, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support per Basile Poco a poco (talk) 13:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support I didn't know we had Category:Arecaceae in Germany as a category until this image ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany