Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tschengla Panorama.jpg

File:Tschengla Panorama.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2011 at 21:20:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Tschengla Panorama.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tschengla Panorama.jpg

•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Info Ski resort on the Tschengla Bürserberg. The mist covered the whole Walgau and pulls up in the Große Walsertal. All peaks are annotated.
•  Support -- Böhringer (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 22:29, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support altrough some of those annonations, you mentioned, are up in the sky.--Snaevar (talk) 23:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think it's good but not outstanding. Lighting could be better (flat on background, dark on right side). - Benh (talk) 11:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Steven Walling 02:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Benh, amazing landscape but poor quality, even the person in the foreground is not sharp --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

• (a) there is no person in the foreground, (b) the red guy does not really needs to be sharp since the image depicts the landscape, (c) the image is pretty sharp, considering the minimum standard of 2Mpix. Please look again and reconsider. --ELEKHH^T 04:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

• Selbstverständlich gehört der Standort der rot gekleideten Person zum Vordergrund des Bildes. Für den Gesamteindruck des Bildes spielt die Schärfe dieses Objektes zwar keine Rolle steht aber exemplarisch für die technischen Mängel. Wenn das Bild mit dieser verhältnismäßig großen Auflösung zur Verfügung gestellt wird dann muss auch diese zur Bewertung herangezogen werden. Im Übrigen ist mir dein persönlich motivierter Kommentar aufgefallen. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

• To me this is an image with person in foreground. Regarding (b)&(c) I expressed in numerous occasions that IMO images should be judged based on the same standard, not taking into account the camera type or submitted resolution. PS. Im Übrigen, mit der "persönlich motivierter Kommentar" liegst du ganz falsch. --ELEKHH^T 00:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

• Für dich mag die Person im Hintergrund des Bildes sein, für mich gehört das zum Vordergrund. Unabhängig von dieser Kaisers-Bart-Diskussion: die technischen Mängel sind unübersehbar. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:14, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Wladyslaw --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 14:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Einstein2 (talk) 10:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice. --TFCforever (talk) 04:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Thomas888b (talk) 12:22, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent! --Aktron (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
•  Support But could be improved by local adjustments (mountain background, snow in right part shadow), as suggested by Benh. I've tried something with GIMP(in the file description page)--Jebulon (talk) 15:14, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:21, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

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