Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Glenfinnan Site.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Glenfinnan Site.jpg, featured
[edit]Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Feb 2013 at 23:00:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Kirua - uploaded by Kirua - nominated by Kirua -- Kirua (talk) 23:00, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Kirua (talk) 23:00, 4 February 2013 (UTC)- Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support Lots of wow. Only defect I can see is a very small amount of CA on the ridges of the hills. Overall a very good and impressive image. --NJR_ZA (talk) 08:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Stryn (talk) 09:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support Oh I feel homesick now. Lovely colours. -- Colin (talk) 12:39, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Oppose bad quality (unsharpness with lacking details, CA, pixelated lines) and underexposed; stunning landscape though. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 12:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)- Support Stunning view. — Draceane diskuse 13:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Very nice in thumbnail but lighting is not the best and image quality is on the poor side. Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm, the alternative you linked is imo over-exposed - the sky is blown and trees too light green. "If you don't like the weather in Scotland, wait five minutes...". On a cloudy day like this, if the wind is strong, the lighting in the glens can change from one minute to the next. Those two photographs are taken four minutes apart and a half-stop different exposure. The scene here, where some of the hills are getting sunlight and others in deep gloom is quite characteristic and natural. -- Colin (talk) 19:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- The two pictures are totally natural and effectively taken almost at the same time. As Colin says, weather is changing so fast there. Jkadavoor, what do you mean by linking the other picture? -- Kirua (talk) 19:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- I wish a bit more lights if possible. I like the light in the middle of second half; but all else is a bit gloomy. Further, I wish a better AOV, giving emphasize to the memorial (?); here the picture seems more emphasize to the bright rights side. Just my opinion; the place is not familiar to me. JKadavoor Jee 04:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Done I added some more light, especially on the dark parts. For the AOV, I have other pictures emphasized to the memorial. I want this one to show all the site, including the viaduct on the right side. Thank you. -- Kirua (talk) 07:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm, the alternative you linked is imo over-exposed - the sky is blown and trees too light green. "If you don't like the weather in Scotland, wait five minutes...". On a cloudy day like this, if the wind is strong, the lighting in the glens can change from one minute to the next. Those two photographs are taken four minutes apart and a half-stop different exposure. The scene here, where some of the hills are getting sunlight and others in deep gloom is quite characteristic and natural. -- Colin (talk) 19:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support Certainly better than other candidates on the proposal now. Yann (talk) 12:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support Some CA, but really FP worthy in my opinion.--Jebulon (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Stas1995 (talk) 16:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- weak oppose For sure a nice landscape and view but I am not convinced of the quality. To archieve a higher level of details should not have been so difficult in this case. IMHO especially the right part (bridge) is underexposed and misses important details. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Slick (talk) 07:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
