Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Villeneuve d'Ascq WLM2016 Église Saint-Pierre de Flers-Bourg (6).jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Villeneuve d'Ascq WLM2016 Église Saint-Pierre de Flers-Bourg (6).jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2016 at 14:17:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
- Info created, uploaded, and nominated by PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ --Pierre André (talk) 14:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Support --Pierre André (talk) 14:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Shadows have been pushed to unrealistic levels. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you for your advice, it'is difficult to repar. The picture is taken against the light, it is not easy to get a real shadow level. --Pierre André (talk) 15:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- I think the earlier version you uploaded was fine - certainly on my screen. Samsara (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed, it would be too dark if you didn't raise the shadows this much. Unfortunately, you can't fix lighting in post. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:49, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you for your advice, it'is difficult to repar. The picture is taken against the light, it is not easy to get a real shadow level. --Pierre André (talk) 15:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per KoH. lNeverCry 19:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose I beg your pardon but I thought that a featured picture is capturing a more or less peculiar scenery in a technically and aesthetically unique manner. Here I find neither the motif peculiar, nor is the choice of the perspective intriguing to me. As to the aesthetics, this is a very average photograph of another church tower to me.--AWeith (talk) 21:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Overprocessed. I don't understand what is wrong with the shadows in the first version. On my screen every relevant detail was well visible. Besides the technical issues I don't like the composition, the lantern is too prominent in the foreground, should have much more distance to the church tower. --smial 23:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice pic, but quality is not high enough for FP --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: I'm afraid this picture does not fit the quality requirements for a Feature, as stated by reviewers above. Sorry, and try again !--Jebulon (talk) 10:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC) | Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. |
- I withdraw my nomination It was a test.... Thank you for your remarks, best regards.--Pierre André (talk) 10:19, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /lNeverCry 23:22, 9 December 2016 (UTC)