Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Peter iredale sunset.jpg

Image:Peter iredale sunset.jpg

Original (left) - not featured

•  Info created by Robertwb - uploaded by Rkitko - nominated by Rkitko --Rkitko 06:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support First time nominating - hope this seems appropriate for featured content. --Rkitko 06:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment This picture needs editing before having a chance. The framing is not good (too much sand in foreground, empty space at (left?) and right) and the horizon is not ... horizontal. After that, who knows?... Alvesgaspar 10:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral Will probably support after some editing norro 11:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Both foreground and background are blurred. Far from being technically perfect. --Derbeth ^talk 16:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

 1 support, 1 neutral, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 7th day) Alvesgaspar 10:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Edited per suggestions (right) - featured

• Cropped a bit (can't go too far or else it would be under 2 million px.), adjusted contrast and brightness. Also adjusted horizon so that it's horizontal. Thoughts? --Rkitko 17:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral for now... I like this picture, otherwise I wouldn't have suggested the edit. Let me "listen" to other opinions... Alvesgaspar 19:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

•  Comment Thanks for your input this far! I do wish I could crop in a bit further. Next time I'll choose something with larger dimensions so cropping won't disqualify the photo by making it too small. Thanks again! I eagerly await other opinions or suggestions. --Rkitko 23:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

•  Support now it's nice... --Jeses 10:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Stands out from the crowd of sunsets norro 17:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support very nice --Digon3 23:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support v2 only. We're near from the minimum size of 1800x1200px but it's enough with it; as rotation creates artefact, it's best to reduce a little the image anyway by a factor not exceeding half the cosine of the rotation angle to avoid those artefacts; the low-band filter must be precisely adjusted for such rescaling after rotation, but unfortunately this was respected so the dark borders of the wood remains are a bit blurred on the background see or sky. This is not dramatic because the rotation angle was not very important. For such images, it's best to be prepared with a support for the camera, and a precise vertical adjustment of the support. And of course the time of shot must be carefully chosen and must not be missed! It's sometimes a matter of a few seconds. Verdy p 01:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I agree it stands out of the existing sunrises/sunsets - Alvesgaspar 20:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Malene Thyssen 18:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Don´t like the composition. I would prefer a tighter crop, but then the resolution would be to low. -- Simonizer 11:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral I think the sky above the clouds has no interest at all, and the picture is banal --Alipho 19:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
•  Support a text-book example for a diagonal composition. --Diligent 19:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer 08:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)